Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - onpon

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 »
That's what I thought, but that only applies if you have agreed to the Game Maker EULA, and if the EULA is legally binding. For example, I have never agreed to Game Maker's EULA as an adult, so I am not bound by those terms. It's a mistake to paint an activity as illegal just because some people have signed contracts forbidding them from doing it.

Decompilers are not illegal. It's just a particular way to do reverse-engineering. The only way you could be not allowed to do it is if you signed a EULA saying you will never reverse-engineer or decompile the software in question - an unjust provision which is unfortunately common.

I haven't studied Game Maker's EULA, so I don't know whether it's "no reverse-engineering" provision applies to people's games made with Game Maker. I feel like it probably does.

Regardless, decompiling does not show how a game is made. It only shows you code (usually in Assembly) that could have been used to produce the given binary. If you want to see how games are made, look at the source code of libre games. Like mine! :D This site catalogs most of the notable ones:

So there's an ongoing crowdfunding campaign which started last month:

This video is worth watching as well:

This is a really neat, and possibly very important project. Basically, it's a standard where there's a small "computer card" holding the actual computer, and that plugs into any compliant housing. This means you can upgrade your computer very cheaply (keep the housing, just upgrade the computer card), and there are tons of possibilities that would be unthinkable normally.

First offerings are a computer card using the Allwinner A20 SoC (which, before you ask, is not GPL-violating), a "micro-desktop" wooden housing, and a 3-D printed laptop housing. The micro-desktop ends up costing a total of $120, while the laptop ends up costing $565 (or you can pay more if you want it pre-assembled for you). But because of the design of the standard, the $500 cost for the laptop housing is flat; when an upgrade is available, you just buy a new computer card for ~$50. You can even very cheaply have several different computer cards for several different purposes and just swap them out through the same laptop housing.

You can also get a set of cables to use an EOMA68 computer card without a housing at all, or a "passthrough card" that lets you use an EOMA68 housing (currently the laptop housing) as a peripheral (e.g. to add a keyboard and bigger screen to your phone, or to use the laptop housing for the screen, keyboard, and mouse of your desktop computer).

If this takes off, it can pave the way to solving the massive problems we have getting even remotely decent hardware for libre software today. I'm really excited about it (I backed it right away when I found out about it, then backed it a few more times after that), and I hope it succeeds! The campaign ends on August 26 and 41% of the funding goal has been raised as of the writing of this post.

Developing ENIGMA / Re: Translations Help
« on: January 29, 2016, 03:37:20 pm »
I just don't want somebody to take my Burger King or big slurpies from me when I can control my own diet just fine.

I don't want that to happen either. Liberty is far more important than trying to police people's health, and banning fast food probably wouldn't improve anyone's health regardless. (If you didn't have Burger King, you would probably find equally unhealthy food somewhere else.)

Developing ENIGMA / Re: Translations Help
« on: January 29, 2016, 02:35:12 pm »
If you really eat 2700 calories a day, you probably do have a high metabolism. That's not the point, though. People's metabolisms vary, sure; as I've said, mine is quite low. But it's habits that result in anyone, high or low metabolism, to gain weight. The key point to note is that if we have a higher metabolism, we crave food more, and so we eat more.

What really tips people over is eating as a result of habit. For you, your biggest vice isn't the fast food, it's the chips, because you ate at least some of them while you were doing work. Mine as a middle schooler wasn't the Ramen noodles, it was the Flamin Hot Cheetos. But when the amount of that you're eating is a small proportion of your diet (such as around 20% in your case), the effect will be small and you may as a result not gain weight from it.

Other habits that can cause people to gain excess weight include being worried about wasting food (refusing to not clean off your plate), never choosing not to eat a meal (e.g. being less picky or following the very bad advice of "never skip breakfast"), and trying to balance out a bad food with a good food (e.g. eating an apple every time you eat a cookie). Ironically enough, some of these might seem like healthy things to do, if you're naïve.

Basically, the best way to maintain a healthy weight is to never eat when you don't feel you need to, especially never eat when you feel like you don't want to, and avoid developing and nurturing habits of eating while doing other activities. Someone like you, or me in middle school, is doing fine in this area, albeit accidentally (and therefore it can easily change in the future, as it did for me). But of course, being skinny isn't all there is to good health. My health was certainly suffering from my habits in middle school, and your health is certainly suffering from your habits. It's just not in a way that results in weight gain.

Developing ENIGMA / Re: Translations Help
« on: January 29, 2016, 11:01:58 am »
3 eggs

That's about 300 calories.


Probably 50 calories or so (considering it's a part of the omlette).

mozzarella cheese, onions, and green peppers, with more cheese sprinkled on top

Probably around 100 calories total for these, though it depends on the exact amount of stuff (mainly the amount of cheese) you used.

Two short cake like zeebra cakes
That's 322 calories, apparently.

a drink of milk

Probably around 150 calories, maybe 200.

Lay's southern style red hot potato chips while studying

I can't find this exact variety of chip, but we're probably talking about 200 calories worth of chips at the most.

burger king whopper

660 calories.

medium fry

440 calories.

Lay's chips again

Again, probably around 200 calories.

So, in total, that's about 2500 calories. That's more than the "standard" 2000 calorie diet, but it's in the typical range for an adult male. So it makes perfect sense that you only weigh 105 pounds.

Developing ENIGMA / Re: Translations Help
« on: January 28, 2016, 04:23:34 pm »
So are you saying the disagreement is that in the majority of cases the leading cause would be diet and caloric intake?

No, all cases. No one who doesn't eat too many calories gets fat, I guarantee you. There are other factors, but they are so small that they are insignificant.

Of course, eating really low-quality ingredients (like white bread) contributes to weight gain, but that's indirect. It's because these low-quality ingredients don't satisfy your hunger, and so you eat more. There are also other such indirect contributions, of course.

I just find it hard to believe too because I not only eat a lot, but my diet is primarily junk food that is as you suggest high in trans fats, calories, and all that other bad stuff.

As was mine in middle school, but I was shocked to find out that my caloric intake was still incredibly low, based on the estimates of a website we used as a part of a class activity (it was a government website, one of the "pyramid" things). In fact, just about every nutrient for me turned out to be "deficient" (based on the flawed assumption of the 2000 calorie diet), including calories, except for fat, which was "normal".

You'd be surprised. Even if you eat vast portions of food at dinner time, for example (which I always used to do), you can easily be consuming 1500 calories or less just by doing things like missing breakfast, or being busy with work, or being busy with a video game. That doesn't mean you're healthy, mind, because if you're really eating a lot of junk food and yet not getting fat, that probably means you're missing out on nutrients.

In my case, when I checked in the beginning of high school (or maybe during middle school, I don't remember exactly the time), this was my typical diet: no breakfast, a turkey sandwich for lunch (with just one slice of turkey and some iceberg lettuce), a pack of Ramen Noodles after school,  some Flamin' Hot Cheetos while watching TV (totaling either one bag or two bags a week; I don't remember which), and whatever we had for dinner, which I might or might not have eaten. Everything other than dinner added up to only around 700-800 calories on average, and of course, dinner varied by what was made for dinner and whether or not I actually liked it (i.e. how much I ate).

Developing ENIGMA / Re: Translations Help
« on: January 28, 2016, 02:43:34 pm »
Hey I am a very reasonable guy, and I agree with everything you said. I just think that everyone is different, so outright banning fast food or big slurpies isn't going to solve the health problems. It depends on each person, their medical history, genetic predisposition, and not just their diet.

You say you agree with everything I said, but then you proceed to disagree with it. :) Really, it's pretty much entirely diet: if you eat more calories, you get heavier. Even exercise doesn't play that huge of a role in determining your weight (though it can help slightly, a bit more so for women).

Developing ENIGMA / Re: Translations Help
« on: January 28, 2016, 01:08:11 pm »
However, I am convinced certain people with weight problems are just built that way (metabolism).

I doubt I can ever convince you of this, but your belief is incorrect. I say this as a person who has, and always has had, a very low metabolism (I currently burn about 1000 calories a day and it couldn't have been more than 1500 in the past), but has never been overweight. In fact, heavier people have higher metabolisms on average because they have to expend more energy to move around.

This all comes down to habits. In my case, while I didn't eat especially healthily as a teenager, I was also extremely picky and very willing to throw away food that either I didn't like, or was contaminated somehow (finding a hair in my food grosses me out intensely). I also tended to eat most of my food at dinner time; it was always a common thing for me to skip breakfast and/or lunch.

Some time about a year ago, I started gaining weight (which I've since then lost again by dieting). Why? It seems to be because I replaced juices with fruits, which I was eating more of in calories (it's amazing how many calories are in a single banana, or apple, or orange), and because I started worrying about wasting food more. Now I'm modifying my behaviors again to rectify this without having to explicitly count calories, and that involves killing an old habit I have of eating or drinking while I'm doing passive activities on the computer (which previously didn't cause a problem because I happened to be choosing relatively low-calorie, but unhealthy, foods and drinks). It also involves further embracing the old habit of skipping meals. :P

General ENIGMA / Re: About dependencies for distributing games
« on: December 06, 2015, 08:11:28 am »
Someone once contacted me saying that the game I have written in ENIGMA requires DUMB (libdumb1)  and ALURE (libalure1). There might be more requirements that he just happened to have already, though, and he didn't say whether or not he had working sound.

General ENIGMA / Re: ENIGMA progress
« on: August 02, 2015, 03:28:54 pm »
Indeed, I was talking about compiling with ENIGMA, not opening in LGM.

General ENIGMA / Re: ENIGMA progress
« on: August 01, 2015, 10:47:50 am »
The binary ones. I don't remember what I've tried other than this and older versions of it, but none of what I've tried has worked. I think it's deleting stuff that confuses ENIGMA's compiler, isn't it? That must be a pretty common action.

General ENIGMA / Re: ENIGMA progress
« on: August 01, 2015, 07:13:24 am »
Considering a large portion of Game Maker files can't even be run by ENIGMA... yeah, I don't think worrying about compatibility is worth it. Keeping use of ENIGMA and LateralGM similar to use of Game Maker is probably worth it, on the other hand.

Off-Topic / Re: New Update to GMS 1.4! Big update
« on: July 13, 2015, 06:23:23 am »
Citation needed. All of my searches tell me that 32-bit x86 programs are capable of addressing 32 bits, i.e. 4 GiB, of RAM. The only reason available RAM is lower is because of the system reserving some of it, and that's more of a moot point when, for example, you run a 32-bit program on a 64-bit system with 8 GiB of RAM.

Off-Topic / Re: New Update to GMS 1.4! Big update
« on: July 12, 2015, 01:27:54 pm »
The limitation is 4 GiB, not 2 GiB. And if I understand it correctly, it's not even the case for i686, which has PAE.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 »