yungblood

Baralis,It would help to know what exactly you're trying to do that html & frontpage won't let you do?Me personally, the only times I've had to go beyond html, was when I did a website for an artist. I used java to provide random wipe effects between images on the front page to display her entire collection. Oh, I also built a website for a guy selling books that used cgi, to make his site more manageable. But for the users, all the cgi did was merge .html files. For him, it handled all the administration. It just made it easier to quickly manage a large number of books, and make it so that adding & deleting books from the list was very easy.Other than those 2 special cases, all the other websites I've built used just html. And I've built some complex sites using just html. Though I must admit, I do cheat a little for some of the actual html creation. Whenever I have a table of contents (or anything that is all all the pages) I have a small program that merges files for me. What it lets me do is write a TOC, or menu in one file, then in all the other files, I use a special tag <MRG "menu.html">. Then once I'm ready to check everything, I run my program over all the files, and it will remove the <MRG> tag, and replace it with what's in the file it references. It just makes for easier management on my part... but still everything is done with just html. :)So please tell us the details of how you need help. -YB

Another possibility, depending on what you're trying to do, is using a program called "Persistance Of Vision" (POV for short). It is great if you are looking for 3d graphics, or if you aren't good with drawing. It can be gotten at http://www.povray.org/ and if you want to see what I did, take a look at http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ to see a cartoon alligator. Scenes are built using a "scene language". You type in what you want, then you render the picture. It is similar to programming in that sense. one of the great things about it is that you don't have to do each picture seperately. Once you build a character that you like, you can copy it and modify the copy. For instance, to move arnie's arm in my picture, all I would have to do is change a few numbers. To give you an idea of how easy it is, it only took me about 4 hours to create arnie. Sure, 4 hours may sound like a long time, but don't let that scare you. You have to take into consideration the fact that I was using an old computer (300MHz) that took about 5 minutes each time I rendered the picture. Also, I was just learning how to use the program. I'm even writing a program to help animate characters in POV. -YB

I've actually done my best not to make it more complex, merely to change the number of players. Granted, a little complexity had to be there to make the game work, but anyone that can play regular chess can play this. I've actually had this game play-tested by both amatuers, and skilled players. Almost all of my play-testers said they really enjoyed it. Only one of my play-testers said he didn't like it. It turns out that it seems to play better with people that are playing for fun, rather than people that are solely playing to win. I suppose that comes from the nature of multi-player games. I've already got part of the marketing in the works. It's the manufacturing that's posing the biggest problem. I'm looking into ways of printing it cheaply, but because of the size of the board, that is posing a problem. It looks like I may have to run my own printing to start with. If I was to have it printed at an ordinary print shop, it would cost over $30 per board, and that's not even having it mounted on fiberboard. That would just be the print on normal wideformat paper. -YB P.S. If anyone wants to know the status of this game, watch http://www.yungblood.com/ for more info. It will be available there first.

I forgot to answer in my other post, yes eyeprint scanners can be fooled, but not easily. You don't leave your eyeprints everywhere. It's not just the color of the eye that the scanner checks, it also checks the lines in your eyes that are as unique as your fingerprints, if not even more unique. Also, eyeprint scanners use a very high resolution digital scanner. You couldn't get an eyeprint from an ordinary photo. From what I know of the technology, the only way to fake it, would be if you could get a real eyeprint from that person, either from an eye scanner, or a high resolution closeup picture of that person's eyes. And that would be difficult to get. -YB

The first thing most people don't realize is that there is no such thing as complete security. If there was, the government wouldn't have to worry about security so much. Anytime access is allowed for someone, it's possible for others to get in. As to my suggestion of "handshake" security, it really only needs to be applied to times when you aren't physically using your bank/credit card. Such as over the phone, or over the internet. That's how *most* identity theft is done. Like the person that mentioned having a info about a credit card that they never used stolen. And it's simple enough feature that that could be done on an ATM, or possibly a computer that directly connects to a bank (not through the internet). Just think, since most people use ATM's fairly often, it wouldn't be that much of a deal to select an option like "pending transactions" and approve/deny them. Or if a bank used callback security for computer transactions that go through a modem. Callback security is good, because not only is it simple, but a hacker would have to have access to the telephone company, or a direct connection to your housephone to access. Callback security is handled like this: 1: Your computer calls the bank, and tells it your account number (or login info). 2: Once the bank gets the info, it hangs up, and calls the phone number associated to the account. 3: Your computer answers, and then you can do transactions like normal from your computer. It all relies on the fact that it would be difficult to get the phone company to transfer the call to another number without it being detected. But you are correct in the fact that most people think that any security that takes any more of thier time is too much. -YB

Really? How'd you find that out? I already hold the copyright for the game that I described with the name HexaChess. I've had the copyright certificate for over 6 months now.I wonder if you found something about my chess game, or if you found something else. Please let me know, you made me very curious.-YB

Hi I've developed a new version of chess that I call HexaChess. Picture 6 people being able to play chess at once, either as teams, or as a free-for-all. As of yet, it's just a board game, I haven't turned it into a computer game yet. Actually, I'm still working on getting it to where I can market it as a board game. All the rules & the board design and everything are done, and I already have the copyright filed, but I'm still trying to find out who I can use for manufacturing. No, I'm not going to sell the copyrights off to another company, I find that's a good way to lose out on money, even if it is easier in the beginning.The reason I'm writing this is I would like to know if anyone's interested in this kind of game, and if anyone knows anything about game publishing.Although each player has 24 pieces instead of 16, the pieces move almost same as regular chess. :blink:Please let me know if you're interested in this kind of game -YB

Eye prints are much more secure than fingerprints, but that's not where we need to get better security. We need access to our accounts remotely in a secure way. Personally, I think it should be done in a "handshake" procedure. The merchant sends a request to your bank/credit company for the amount, then you have to contact your bank/credit company and explicitly tell them that you accept the transaction. To me, that would be so much harder to break, because the security wouldn't go through the merchants at all, it would be strictly between you & the bank/credit company.But as long as people want easy access to thier money, they won't have the security they want.-YB(PS) Any banker that would turn around and sell credit card info wouldn't be classified as a hacker, they have easy access to that info. That's more like embezzlement.

Personally, I think fingerprints are a great backup means of identification, but not as a means of primary identification. Aside from the fact that scaners have varing degress of sensitivity, and that it would take a long time to sort all the fingerprints, just think of all the fingerprints we leave everywhere.Back when I was in grade school, my parents got me a "DetectoLab" kit. It included the basic scientific equipment needed for detective stuff, along with a fingerprinting kit. It gave me enough stuff I could easily find usable prints of a decent quality. They expected you to dust black (or white) powder over where you thought there were prints. Any prints there would show up, and if you wanted to keep a copy of a print, you could use scotch tape to save it. Yea, it worked ok, though I found taking a picture of the print to preserve it better.As I have mentioned in other posts, I am a hacker, so it is normal for me to think in terms of security. The reason we have so many criminals out there, is because it's so easy to get away with most types of crime. We just don't have a big enough police force, or an effecient enough court system. As most people can imagine, counterfieters spend a sizeable amount of money on thier money/check printing machines. For only a few thousand dollars, I could get the machines needed do duplicate fingerprints. And it would get past almost all fingerprint scanners. Since I'm sure I'm not the first person to use this idea (there are even variations in movies of this idea), let me lay it out.1: using a superfine powder, dust for fingerprints in comman areas used by the public.2: once you find clear fingerprints, take a closeup picture of them with a hi res digital camera.3: using a "3D printer", print the fingerprint on a thin plastic/rubber (or simular material) film.4: cutout the print, and apply to your finger.5: use print on a scanner.6: Instant Access.Since most people aren't familiar with 3D printers, let me describe them. First, think of an inkjet printer. It's print heads sweep back and forth printing a page in narrow bands. The rollers in the printer hold the page steady, and ensure that it advances just enough of the page to have each band of printing aline with the previous. With a 3D printer, it holds the "page" immobile, and the print heads not only sweep back & forth, but the whole track moves up & down the "page". 3D printers don't use ink, they print with other materials. Some use clay/wax. Others can use plastics, cement, metal, and other more advanced materials. The print heads build up the 3D object by printing each layer one on top of the next, until you have a complete object. 3D printers are slowly making thier way to the public, especially for people into modeling, and people that want to make molds from CAD type computer files.As you can see, it really wouldn't take that much to copy peoples fingerprints, considering how much we leave fingerprints everywhere.Me, I would have the fingerprint data of all a person's fingers saved when you get a credit card. So that you would use your fingerprint to verify that the card is yours, instead of a signiture. But even that leaves the biggest problem with identity theft, using a credit card remotely, either over the phone, or the internet.To me, it would be much wiser to figure out a way to get around that problem. I have a few ideas, but they would take more time than I have right now to describe them.Anyways, to sum up, we leave too many fingerprints behind everywhere to use them to protect our money. (Unless everyone always wore gloves...)-YB

Well, Personally I don't believe in dragons either the eastern, or western types as being real, at least not as portrayed in mythology. The dinosaur idea is a certainly a possibility. It does in part fit with the concept of dragons.Here's another interesting fact, the Bible refers to several dragons, including the great dragon, satan the devil. And it refers to dragons that were worshipped in earlier religions, especially in Babylon.-YBB)

I'm looking for tools that work with the POV engine. I use POV for all kinds of stuff, and I can create some great 3D pictures. But sometimes I find it takes a long time to get a scene to look just right.I know there must be some good tools out there for POV, but I haven't found any. Am I just looking in all the wrong places, or what? I would love it if I could use something like wireframe to be able to edit the objects easier when I'm trying to place them, or maybe something to let me move objects' skeleton's for 3D animation.Right now, I do everything by hand. True, I can make some good picture with it, but I would like to be able to do more.Hopefully someone out there knows more about what's available than I do.-Thanx!--YB

Damn, I almost completely forgot about that game! Thanks for reminding me about it, it is awesome!! I haven't played it in years, but I remember how much fun it was!!-YB

Hrm, that looks interesting. Though for what I'd like to do, if I used GameMaker, I'd have to use the registered version. I'm looking for the ability to create multiplayer networked 3D games. Though not necessarily rpg.Thanks for the info -YB

Perhaps you don't realize it, but alot of problems are solved by hackers If it wasn't for hackers, security wouldn't be near as good as it is. I've been doing some posting in a forum that is explaining true hacking. As I have said in other posts, most of the websites that get harmed, are not by hackers. Granted, there are some real hackers out there that use thier knowledge for harm, but most don't. Most sites that get attacked, are attacked by people running programs that are written by others. It's the wanna-be's that attack sites. They don't want to take the time to learn the real skill of hacking, so they try to impress people by running these programs to attack sites, or they find some unprotected sites, and they abuse it. This is *NOT* hacking. Hacking is much like reverse-engineering. It takes alot of time, knowledge, and skill. True hacking is a good thing, because it reveals flaws missed by others. Here's the way it usually happens: 1: A hacker discovers a flaw in a program or protocol. 2: She/he informs both the company that designed the program/protocol, and the general public. (usually the info is posted on some hacking site). 3: If the company decides to take notice of this flaw, they put out an update fixing it. If they don't do anything about it, at least the information is available to the public that the program/protocol is insecure, so they can decide not to use it. 4: Some programmer takes the info about the flaw, and writes a program that exploits it. 5: Some wanna-be finds the program, and starts using it to abuse sites. Now with a DOS attack, it's kind of a special case. Yes, it's been known about for a long time, however, it's a hard problem to fix. It is a flaw in the tcp/ip stack that the internet is built upon. It can't be fixed in the normal way, because it is a protocol problem, not a program problem. It can't be truely fixed without completely changing the foundation of the internet. No one wants to lose the internet, and it's too big of a job to completely change everything all at once. Imagine if we suddenly found out that oxygen is poisonous. How long would it take to protect everyone on the earth? Would we even be able to find a way to make that protection affordable to everyone? See the problem? From what I understand, Internet Protocol Version 6 (ipv6) is supposed to not be affected by attempted DOS attacks. I personally haven't had the time to study it all, but that's what I hear. But since all the internet software we use is designed for ipv4 (the current version of the internet protocol), it will take a long time before ipv4 is not used anymore. So as you can see, it's not the hackers that are the real problem. They do us a service in finding the security flaws. It's the fact that some problems just can't be fixed very fast because of political, economical, and other reasons. As long as there are people that want to cause harm, the internet will never be completely safe. Remember, it only takes one harmful person to cause damage, and even though the percentage of harmful people is low, the shear number of people on the internet makes that low percentage a high number. Even if only 1% of the people on the internet cause harm, if you figure 3 billion (just guessing) people on the internet, that would mean 30 million causing harm. So please, don't blame us hackers for the problems If you want someone to blame, there is only one: Satan the devil. He is real, and he does more damage than anyone else. If it wasn't for him, there would be no evil. Hence, there would be no crime, on the net, or elsewhere. -YB

rantsh, Here's another simple challenge for wou to try. Get a copy of the book "Jurassic Park" by Michael Crichton. There are several pictures of a simple fractal in that book. Each one is the same fractal at a different progression. One of the pictures was flipped the wrong way in the copy I got, but once you start seeing the pattern, it should be easy to spot. The challenge is to figure out the algorithm used to create that fractal. It's a simple enough kind of fractal that you can figure it out on paper, without any help from a computer. In fact, that's how I decided to figure it out, just for a mental excercise. It's a good way to look at information in way simular to encryption. Granted, this example is more or less like shifting letters "a=b, b=c, c=d", since it is a standard pattern. It is a little bit more, because the pattern is progressive. The pattern, although simple, never completely repeats itself.Because of that feature of that particular algorithm, I have used it in my own sercurity on my personal network. Using it, along with some other tools I've made, passwords never need to be sent across my network.Here's how I used it, along with the general concept of the security I'm using:Let's say I want to telnet to my server.1: The client software opens up a connection to the server2: The client then uses the "password", connection info, and time to encrypt the string "Login: Username"3: The server takes this encrypted string, and decrypts it using the real password, connection info, and time.4: If the server gets the correct string from the decryption, it accepts the connection.Notice, the password itself never crossed the network, it was just used in the encrypting & decrypting.The reason for this is that the password is actually the control for the encryption. My security uses 256 different encryption algorithms. Each one is tied to a character. To help you understand the concept of what's going on, picture this:algorithm "r" shifts the bits one to the right,algorithm "a" reverses the order of the bits,algorithm "n" NOT's the bitsalgorithm "t" XOR's the byte with the previous byteapplying any one of those simple algorithms would be broken very fast, however when stacked, it would take longer. But it would still be breakable. But on top of that, I add the algorithm for the fractal. What it controls is the rotation of the algorithms. It makes it so that the algorithms are rotated periodically, and not in static way. So maybe first it waits 5 bytes to shift algorithms, and next time it waits 7, and the next 3, etc... as you can see, each piece is used to make it harder to break. And since much of it relies on having previous pieces correct, one mistake will corrupt the rest of the stream.Also, another part that helps ensure protection is the length of the password as the computer sees it. You may only be typing in something like "ProtectMe", but the computer would use something like "ProtectMe/154.87.243.16:1024/125.13.4.156:8080/14:24:56:99/12/15/2005"As you can see, it makes for a rather complex "password" and since the order of the algorithms is critical, it doesn't see "pass" as "asps" or anything like that. Also since there is no comparing of a password against a list, there isn't a time differential between a valid login, and a false login.Hope this gives you some idea what kind of protection and it can give you some insight as to what hacking encryption can entail -YB

Most people that do damage to sites are generally called "script kiddies" because they are simply running programs written by others, and they don't know what's going on in the program. These programs usually only work if the site is unprotected, or thier security is really out of date. These kind of individuals usually can't do anything to a reasonably protected site. And unless you get really big, of have something extremely interesting hidden within your site, the real hackers will probably leave you alone.-YB

rantsh, If money is still an obsticle, getting linux is a free way to learn much of what you want to know. It comes with alot of documentation, and by studying the code, it can show you not only how many programs work under the surface, but also how security programs and encryption works. I personally have taken a copy of the blowfish encryption library from a linux program, and ported it over to windows, and beefed up the security on it abit. So there is a wealth of information in linux if you're willing to spend the time sorting it out.-YB

According to old school "hacking" rules, you've already broken one of the main ones... asking for help to get started ;)I am a hacker by the old definition. One who goes into systems for knowledge, not to destroy. In fact, I would never go into personal info if I found any. At the most, the only changes I would make to a system that I got into is leave a message saying that thier system was insecure, and stating how I got in.Most people that call themselves hackers are not true hackers. Most just run programs that other people make without understanding what is truely going on behind the scenes. All they usually want to do is cause damage to sites.If you want to learn how to become a real hacker, I can point you in the right direction, but it is up to you to do the work.When I was learning piano/keyboard, my teacher told me there are 3 P's in music: Practice, Practice, Practice. In hacking, there are 3 R's: Research, Research, Research. To start, I recommend learning linux, because you can look through all the source code. Also, get a copy of all the RFC's (Request For Comments) that document the protocols of the internet. Learning to read programming languages is a must, if you want to see what's going on. Watch the tcp/ip stack to see the communication between your computer, and others. Once you understand what is going on, then you can take a program that allows you to open a connection, and manually talk to other computers. Learning something like http is an easy way to start.I've told you alot more than I should have. I have one other recommendation, only hack your own computers. When you hack computers you don't own, you run the risk of going to federal prison. And don't forget the 3 R's of hacking.-YB

I used to be a hacker, and let me tell you what I've found.Anything that can be changed by an authorized person remotely, can be changed by anyone that wants to do enough research to get in. There is no such thing as "absolute security". Although most of my knowledge is with computer "security", it applies to all types of security.In the mind of a hacker, any upgrade to "security" is merely a challenge. Whenever a company says that thier new system is unbreakable, I want to see if thier claim is true. I now only hack my own computers. And although I don't spend as much time hacking as I used to, I still haven't found any type of protection that can't be broken. Also, the more protection that is put on any kind of site, the more hassles the real users have to deal with. It's all a compromise. If you wanted to have a dozen layers of security to get into a site, that could be done. Sure, it would make it harder on any hacker to break in, but that also makes it take longer for you to get in.So just remember, there is no way to completely prevent you site from getting hacked. But if you keep your website small, not near as many hackers will want to try to break in.-YB

I would have (at least) 2 ways of looking up a movie. I would have one list divided by type, and a second list divided by the first letter of the name. Think of all the files on the computer when you look in windows explorer. It would be too confusing if there weren't directories. So I would use the same concept in my movie menu. And I would choose a remote that has the equivilant of the 4 arrow keys. R/L to go into & out of the directories. U/D to scroll through the lists. That would make it all manageable I might even add the option of looking for simular movies, or other movies with the same actors/director I've setup many databases with the purpose of making all the data accessable without being confusing. To me, this is the same thing with different data Besides, with a remote that has a directional pad (or arrow buttons) I can use that as if it's a mouse since it's a computer working behind the scenes. And if I want keyboard capability without a keyboard, Both Windows & Linux have virtual keyboard programs that you can use with just a mouse (or equivilant) -YB

I've seen a 500GB hdd. What I would love to do once I get enough $$ is build a computer system connected to something like coraid. Think of boxes with 15 500GB drives each. That's 7.5 TB a box! Then I would have it all set up so that I could store my entire movie collection on it (both DVD & VHS). Just imagine, I'm sitting in my living room with a projector for a TV. I want to watch a movie, so instead of getting up and walking to the shelf of videos, I simply pull out my remote. Then I hit a button to see the list of movies I own, scroll to the movie I want, and press play. And with this kind of setup, I could access my movie library from any TV in the house! Just imagine that kind of freedom. I would also have several TV tuners in the central server so that it can also pull "TiVo" type duties, recording all the shows I want. :DSo yea, I would love to have TB hdd's!! The more I can store per hdd, the cheaper I can build my system. Especially as price per GB comes down.

m^e:Thanks for the tips. I really appreciate it.!-YB

I don't think you get what I'm saying... I'm not trying to run .bat files, or any OS commands. I need a scripting language such as TCL, Perl, Python, etc. that will interact with my program. You can see what I'm trying to do if you read my other posts. Simply put, I want a scripting language tied into my program, so that when a user opens up a script within my program, it will run within my program, executeing functions that I wrote in my program... --YB

Hey, where would I be able to find out more about 3d programming under windows? I have a few concept ideas I would like to try out.--YB

Imagine being able to play a video game (one that you play a character) without a video game system. One person controls the "world" of the game, and everyone else playing is a character. It's kind of like the computer games that are played online where everyone runs a character. Dice are used to see if what you try succeeds, and if it does, how well it succeeds. For instance, I tell the "game master" that I am swinging a sword at a bad guy. I roll a 20 sided dice, add the number that comes up with some numbers on my sheet that represents how good I am with a sword. The game master then compares that number to the number the bad guy has that represents both his skill at dodging, and the armor he is wearing. If I rolled higher than his number, I hit him. I would then roll another dice to see how hard I hit him. The total number of "hit points" of damage I do to him are then subtracted from his life points. When his life points go below 0, he is out of the fight (possibly dead, in standard d20 games, death is at -10). And so the game goes, and you get to explore dungeons, mazes, cities, castles, and whatever else the game master has prepared for you. In many ways it is just like what happens when you play a computer game, just without the computer -YB