VooDoo Chicken

 

Advertisement
 

If you are here you are probably looking for T-shirts, as it's been years that this page has nearly no traffic.

 

T-Shirts be here

(T-Shirts this way, Follow the Soylent Green Road)

 

There are some free coffee break games and other stuff for download. Whatever you do with it is at your own risk, which means that if for using one of the games or anything you do in this site (including buying T-shirts) your country explodes, a black hole sucks all your family and your dog looses an eye, deal with it on your own, even if I was advised something may occur (not that I know there is something wrong with the things posted here so far). Hope you enjoy it.

Some of the things here have a 'Mac' version (when Flash exported in Mac executable format also), I have not tested them yet, though I suppose they work.

 

Travesía en el Hielo

Travesía en el Hielo (Ice trip). The one I probably like the most from my old games. Move the mouse and click to slap the fishes, keys 1, 2, 3, 4 to select which penguin gets it.

PC Mac

 

Travesía en el Hielo 2

Travesía en el Hielo 2 (Ice trip 2). A remake of my very first Flash game. It is basically the same mechanics, except instead of avoiding things in the water, you had to avoid ghosts, trees, pumpkins if I am not mistaken and other stuff. Graphics were lousy but the sound was great, so i expect to recycle that sound for something else; if I can find the files.

PC Mac

 

Travesía en el Hielo 3

Travesía en el Hielo 3 (Ice trip 3). It was intended as an advergame for a company that makes beverages, and has a penguin for a logo. It was not used for that, so I turned it into something different, but the result is something that almost makes no sense, tough I like the animations. Keys 1, 2, 3 to select action: change the penguin direction so he does not run out of the stage, grab it (to explode it), or recall more penguins. Explode the penguins on people when they seem to be getting too hot. Score depends on how many clothes are on the floor when you give something to a penguin; you give clothes to penguins to get more movements/penguins. No virtual penguins were harmed during this game (they reincarnate as Doom extras, then that's where they get hurt). Virtual penguin meat is recycled as virtual dog food so it does not get wasted.

PC Mac


 

Salvemos a Precario

Salvemos a Precario. This one, rather than a game itself is more like a test to try aspects you would need in a side scroller. You may consider it a game with a half of a quarter of the length of a single level, with only one boss.

PC Mac

 

Control de Pestes

Control de Pestes (Pest Control). Aim, shoot. The basics.

PC Mac

 

Internet Explorer

 

Joy of Tech

 

 

Green Man on a Trip

Green Man on a Trip. Also, one of my first Flash games. I made it basically to test what I considered 'special effects' at the time.

PC Mac

 
POSSIBLE (as in, first they must be verified before doing something about it) medical causes worth studying:

Epilepsy - blinking lights. The quantity of blood in the brain may be different when looking at a bright picture than a darker one, since the brain needs less effort to understand the picture. The change between bright and dark causes flux of blood in and out, and it may be related with the basic physical damage of pipes when flux is irregular. Caution when placing a ceiling fan near the ceiling lights, because of the shadow projected.

Sudden death in babies because of lack of oxygen. Babies spit a lot (produce a lot of saliva), and have not enough coordination and muscle control/understanding to turn themselves to the right position, like a turtle on its back. Most or all babies are left sleeping face up (how else), and probably while sleeping they choke with their own spit.I heard though, that there are most cases of sudden death when babies are face down than face up; probably suffocatted by the pillow?

Edit: I was gonna suggest that may be a solution could be a sleep positioner (wedge pillow). As a disclaimer, I am no expert in this, and these are just guesses, but since babies could suffocate while sleeping face down (with the mattress) and they also could suffocate while sleeping face up with their own spit, a possible solution could be that they sleep reclined. It seems both FDA and CPSC have advised against them (sleep positioners); precisely because they could cause suffocation. The best solution: be aware of your baby, and keep checking.

 
I was gonna call this part 'blood movies', but it would sound like yellow press. No, it's got nothing to do with gore in movies, it has to do with things like this: you are an actor and you get a part in a movie; this is your big chance. As it usually happens, the director is a big shot, and to show he is a big shot, he has to act as a cretin (you can not prove you are important unless you act like a maggot but everybody puts up with you).
As it is industry standard, many things that are captured on film are not scripted; they are instead drafted vaguely or they occur with no previous notice to the actors, so the reaction looks natural; for example, if you want to see the reaction of the actors after an explossion, you may not tell the actors about the explossion, but just make things blow up and see how the actors react, so their reaction looks natural on film; if you want to see the faces of the actors under danger situations, put the actors under danger situations and film their faces.
Ok, that's one part, but what if the situation is like this: you either do the part, even if you have to risk your life, or you are out of the film.. this is your big chance.. hard chance you'll get another one, and if you are not willing to risk your life at my whims, there are a gazillion wannabe actors waiting for their big chance who are willing to risk their lives or turn into whores for the chance to appear once in the big screen, and if you don't like it, what are you gonna do, run crying to your mommy?.
Here are some comments from the crew on Michael Bay's site after he fired Megan Fox from the Transformers series: 'She was famous! She was the next Angelina Jolie, hooray! Wait a minute, two of us worked with Angelina – second thought – she's no Angelina. You see, Angelina is a professional.'. 'We know this quite intimately because we've had the tedious experience of working with the dumb-as-a-rock Megan Fox on both Transformers movies.'. Her answer: "He's like Napoleon and he wants to create this insane, infamous mad-man reputation. He wants to be like Hitler on his sets, and he is. So he's a nightmare to work for but when you get him away from set, and he's not in director mode, I kind of really enjoy his personality because he's so awkward, so hopelessly awkward.". Yes Mr. Bay, those comments were because she had to wake up at 6 am., not because she had to stay at a few cms. from a large blade that was cutting metal, with no way of calculating the direction of debris, and if there was a mistake, everybody would die.
This kind of things have lead to situations like actors kicking the director's ass in stage.. is it not, Mr. Bay?. In later comments, Bay said he fired Megan Fox after Steven Spielberg told him to, as he was the executive producer of the films.
More situations like this: in the movie 'True Lies', from director 'James Cameron', the actress Jamie Lee Curtis made a scene in the roof of a limo trying to catch a copter. About that scene, James Cameron said it was Curtis who requested to do that scene herself; Curtis later belied that, and repeats what she really said: "Oh, yeah. And just where are you going to be while I'm dangling way up there in the air, Jim?". In the same movie, the actress Eliza Dushku, who plays the part of the daughter, broke some ribs in a stunt, when she was just a 12 years old girl. Or maybe actor Brendan Fraser wants to comment about some incidents during 'The Mummy Returns'. Part of the decline of Fraser's career has been due to back problems.
Ok, so not every director/producer is a jerk, some actors/actresses genuinely request to do their own stunts, and not all the times something happens on set is because of negligence; it is understood that accidents happen, but just as a heads up: if you have a lousy plot, making more explosions won't make it better, and if you paid good money for an actor/actress contract and you chose that person because he or she would generate revenue, you don't try to kill that person.
Just like if those things where not enough, how about the hypocrisy that surrounds them: if during the film somebody steps on a dog by accident, there will be comments all over the tabloids about animal treatment, about the comments by PETA etc. It seems that if a monkey attacks a child in location and somebody tries to stop it, it is a big deal.. but it does not apply if human beings get screwed big time by negligence or incompetence by the directors and the crew. Basically, an animal is more important than you.
No, these are not isolated cases, these things happen all the time, but since everybody who steps into a set is forced to sign a non disclosure document, every thing that happens in the set may go out to the public as 'an accident in a car, which had nothing to do with the filming'; and basically, if you step into a set, is because you are a tool.
Ok, so that's for the actors/actresses who in one way or another do this because they got their big chance and most chances are they knew or had an idea of what they were getting in, is that all? Hmm.. not really, and that is the saddest part: during the filming of Transformers 3, in a car chase scene where a call for extras was announced, the cable that was towing a car got loose and in the whiplash, the cable broke through the windshield of the car being towed, and got into the skull of the person in it. A 24 years old woman called Gabriela Cedillo, who attended the call as she saw it as a possibility to some day be an actress and that was a way to get into the scene, now has lost the movement of one complete side of her body and the left eye for the rest of her life. The studio placed the blame on a bad welding. Why is it sad? Because the welding properties can be calculated so this kind of things don't happen; if it was not possible to calculate a welding properties, then there would be no planes or cars, because they would stay in one piece just by luck. Fortunately, we know enough about forces, material properties and so on, to build things as they are supposed to be. This is obviously the result of negligence.. but hey, the movie made millions.
I believe it is just fair that everything that happens in the set gets disclosed, under penalty of law, either at the end of the production or during the production, but before theatrical release, so we, as viewers and clients, decide to either support or not, as our own choice, the negligence and stupidity of incompetent directors that replace a good story with risk scenes, even though they are pussies that don't take the risks themselves.
This is in comparison to buying a diamond, so the person who buys the diamond, gets to know if this is or not a blood diamond.
Some aspects that should be disclosed are: Was the actor/actress aware of the type of scenes requested during production, their risks and so on? are the scenes the same as described before signing up? did the crew take all necessary security measures, according to an expert in the subject? was any of the specifications of the expert denied or replaced? what was the reason for denying those measures? was the director in the same risk group as the crew or the actors making the scene? which one was the reason for the accident? those, amongst others.

 

Another day, another rant. Again with movies, luckily not all directors and producers are divas that try to kill their actors because is somebody else who is risking their lives yet they get all the credit 'for being a genius'.

This time is about structures: Some jerks have no problem destroying constructions of hundreds of years ago so people talk about how in the film they destroyed a building of hundreds of years; even if nobody will talk about the film two years after it is released. Also luckily, this is not very common now, as now destroying buildings is quite easy (and cheap) with CGI.

 

I was raised as a Catholic and for a while I considered myself religious (now I feel awkward about some things back then); now, if something, I would call myself 'agnostic'.

Here is a post in the forum of a web site about cartoons:

"One problem with trying to eliminate God in order to believe you can do whatever you want… is that you’ll ultimately lead others to believe they can do whatever THEY want (including to you)"

The original topic was not about religion but about the cartoon of the day, but as sometimes it happens with general-topic forums, somehow it drifted to religion (as it also happens with politics).

The thing is, when we were kids our moms probably said that if we did not eat our vegetables, the Boogie Man would come to take us who knows where, but it would not be pleasant. I don't think any grown up still believes in this; but for me at least, a grown up that still expects the Boogie Man if he does not eat his vegetables would be a sign of immaturity.

Maybe is not about the vegetables anymore, but it looks like we still remain in the same mind set. Unless we are talking about a lost tribe that still does human sacrifices in the middle of the jungle, most religions state more or less the same things; they are all about 'don't kill other people', 'don't steal from other people' and so on. Those statements are not bad things; those things are actually the result of maximizing our wellness while living in a society, maximizing the wellness of the whole society as well (but apparently those were not obvious and we needed to hear them from a divine entity).

In practice, even though all religions state the same things, it seems fine to do wrong to those other people if they practice some other religion, or if they are from the same religion but we say we repent from it. For many, religion seems to be more about brand positioning rather than to behave nicely; also, if I believe that if my Boogie Man is from a different brand than yours, you will have no fear of eternal damnation therefore you are not obliged to act well; therefore you are a bad person. ‘We’ are the good ones; the others are evil, because they worship the devil.

Maybe we should start educating to act nice not because of the Boogie Man that is waiting for us in the afterlife, but because our actions have consequences right now, and if we are aware that if something is wrong it does not depend on if a cop is watching or if a magic being told us to do or not to do so, but that the quality of our lives while being part of a society depends on the actions of all of us together.

Now go eat your vegetables, or the Boogie Man will come to get us.

 

Today there was a discussion in a forum about a cartoon, where somehow people discussed about Shakespeare. It was nothing related to literature (it was a cartoon, like the ones on ‘the funny pages’), but still, somebody referred to ‘to be or not to be’ as ‘2B squared’. Actually it should not be ‘2B squared’. The sentence has an ‘or’ in the middle, and ‘or’ is akin to addition, not multiplication; so the sentence would be more related to something like ‘2B times two’ rather than ‘2B squared’.
Also, since ‘that was the question’, the answer would be TRUE. To be or not to be is equivalent to a | ¬a (a or not a, where a = 2B; I am using ¬ instead of ! because with some typefaces it may not be clear); and that expression holds TRUE. In case the or was an exclusive or (xor), which may make more sense, the sentence above would be replaced by something like (a | ¬a) & ¬(a & ¬a).
Some authors may disagree tough; as for some authors ‘the answer’ is 42. But ‘to be or not to be’ (the question).. 42 (the answer).. does not fit. Let’s pretend it was a different question.
My guess is that in the planet of origin of the mice they used some kind of language with infinite words. But in earth, since we are so primitive and we use languages with a finite number of words, every sentence that can be described in words is part of a set that even though is infinite, is enumerable (compare to integer numbers, which are expressed with a finite set of digits, yet even tough is infinite, any quantity may be described with those digits). So, if ‘the question’ can be expressed with words, it may be enough to make a simple program that enumerates the sentences that can be assembled with the finite set of words, and eventually ‘the question’ will pop up. You can even speed the process using dimensional analysis, to check which sentences may have a numeric equivalence, and optimize which sentences have an answer in that range

Yes I am totally aware that I was rambling above. I am kinda hypocrite since I don’t have too much patience with people that discuss which ship can kick the other ship’s ass between Star Wars and Star Trek (or who would win between Batman and Superman). The answer would be nobody, since none of those ships exist, and it may be whoever the author wants them to win. I was doing the same thing, making arguments out of nowhere for something that somebody made out of nowhere, but that got me thinking about how in movies, sometimes they want us to believe the character is the most intelligent person in the world, so he or she says something that is supposed to sound ‘transcendental’. Unless the writer of the script was the most intelligent person in the world, whatever comes out of the mouth of the character will most probably look ridiculous when trying to pretend it was the most intelligent thing to say. Either that or ‘the black box’ solution, where something that we can not explain is enclosed in a box, and in most cases, it affects the entire world and only one person can save us all, saving or destroying that black box.
Just to come clean, I haven’t read a single complete Shakespeare thing, and the things I know about his works are the same things people repeat everywhere all the time; but I did see the ‘Hitchhikers’ movie (and I like it).

Nonetheless this also happens in other areas, like ‘the Turing test’, which implies that to know if an entity has intelligence, we should be able to sustain a rational conversation with it. It means that Google and Siri may be the most intelligent entities on this planet, even tough Siri may not have the slightest idea of what a gas station is (yet is able to search for its definition in Google and read it aloud, or point us to the nearest gas station), or have the concept of a vehicle, or that vehicles need gas to move. In the same way, if an alien that was able to travel from a galaxy far away, or even the most intelligent person in this world is in front of us, but he or she speaks in a different language and we are not able to communicate, that person is stupid. Same thing with babies.
Actually the Turing test concept is flawed, in the same way the problem of the chicken and the egg is flawed. Both have clear, objective answers; the problem is they are flawed syntactically. The chicken and the egg may have a very simple answer, but it fails because we are not clear in our definitions of chicken and egg and even though I may have a clear definition, my definition of chicken (related to eggs) may be different than the definition of chicken from the person in front of me. Same thing with the Turing test, it fails because we are not clear about the definition of intelligence

 
 
 
Advertisement
 
© 2012, 2013, 2014

 

 Get Firefox!