Thursday, March 19, 2020

Meanwhile, On The Table Top....

These days my body demands a break from the painting desk more often than it once did. There was work to be done but....





c


The heroes of the day: two companies of the Victoria Rifles which were posted in a wood were attacked by three Rebel companies and saw them off by the skin of their teeth. 

So, just a quick, simple, encounter over randomly generated terrain. Looked like a walk over until near the end  when the Rebel General woke up and it became close.

Back to painting on Saturday.

Tech Book Face Off: Facts And Fallacies Of Software Engineering Vs. Programming Pearls 2

Since I've been hitting the tech books pretty hard for a while now, for this Tech Book Face Off I wanted to take a bit of a breather and do a couple of relatively easy reads. These books have been on my to-read list for some time, so I decided to finally check them out. The first one, Facts and Fallacies of Software Engineering by Robert L. Glass is a book in a similar vein as The Pragmatic Programmer in that it relates various tidbits of advice on the craft of software engineering. As for Programming Pearls 2 by Jon Bentley, this book surprised me. I thought it would be somewhat similar to Facts and Fallacies, just more directly related to instructive programming examples than to the software engineering field at large, but it turned out to be quite a bit different, as we'll see in this review.

Facts and Fallacies of Software Engineering front coverVS.Programming Pearls front cover

Facts and Fallacies of Software Engineering

Robert L. Glass is an odd duck. His writing is at the same time strongly opinionated and calmly easygoing. He adamantly argues for each of his observations as 55 facts, with 10 fallacies thrown in at the end, but his discussion of each one is quite conversational. He admits that not everyone will agree with his facts, even though he provides evidence and sources for them. (Well, he does for a majority of them, at least.) I found this book a quick, enjoyable read, and it was worthwhile even if I didn't always agree with his propositions because they always made me think. I'd much rather read a book that I sometimes disagreed with if it challenges me, than a book that's poorly written and says everything I want to hear.

I'm not going to relate every fact and fallacy from the book here, since that would make this review nearly as long as the book, but they do cover the gamut of software engineering. I'll describe them in broad strokes and discuss a few that I found especially interesting.

The first chapter deals with software management related things. The facts are broken up into smaller sections of people (the software engineers), tools and techniques, estimation, reuse, and complexity. A full 22 facts are covered in this chapter, including one about how tools and techniques are over-hyped that I found particularly thought-provoking. Even back when this book was written in 2002, tools were being promoted as a panacea for software development problems while they were simultaneously showing diminishing returns, and Glass was having none of it:
Time was, way back when, that new software engineering ideas were really breakthroughs. High-order programming languages. Automated tools like debuggers. General-purpose operating systems. That was then (the 1950s). This is now. The era of breakthrough techniques, the things that Fred Brooks (1987) referred to as silver bullets, is long since over. Oh, we may have fourth-generation languages ("programming without programmers") and CASE tools ("the automation of programming) and object orientation ("the best way to build software") and Extreme Programming ("the future of the field") and whatever the breakthrough du jour is. But, in spite of the blather surrounding their announcement and advocacy, those things are simply not that dramatically helpful in our ability to build software.
What's most interesting is that 17 years later, the hype machine hasn't stopped, and it shows no signs of slowing down. I wouldn't say that's surprising, given that software engineering is such a massive sector, and people continue to try to make money off of it however they can, but it shows how relevant this book still is. Advances in software engineering ideas do still happen, but they are still incremental. It isn't that incremental is bad, but it is all that we should expect now. Productivity free lunches aren't likely to come about anymore until the next breakthrough technology happens, and that may not be software but something else entirely.

Chapter 2 is about the software life cycle with sections on requirements, design, coding, error removal, testing, reviews and inspections, and maintenance. Maintenance in particular is a fascinating subject in software because it ends up taking the majority of the time and cost of any given project, mostly without our realizing it. It's also quite difficult and no one wants to do it because the documentation sucks. There's a reason for that:
To solve those problems, software people have invented the notion of maintenance documentation—documentation that describes how a program works and why it works that way. Often such documentation starts with the original software design document and builds on that. But here we run into another software phenomenon. Although everyone accepts the need for maintenance documentation, its creation is usually the first piece of baggage thrown overboard when a software project gets in cost or schedule trouble. As a result, the number of software systems with adequate maintenance documentation is nearly nil.
Here we can see both Glass' conversational writing style and the reasonable way of thinking that he shows in most of his facts and fallacies. It's hard to argue with this one, especially because I think most of us have been in similar situations.

The next chapter is about software quality, including sections on quality, reliability, and efficiency. Like the other chapters, these facts are mostly obvious to anyone who has been working in the field for more than a few years, but it's always good to refresh your memory on these ideas. The last chapter of facts is just a single fact on research: many researchers advocate rather than investigate. I can't say whether or not this is true from my own experience or reading, but I'm not too concerned about it.

Starting with chapter 5, the next three chapters deal with the 10 fallacies. Chapter 5 loops back around to management with similar sections to the first chapter. The fallacies include things like, "you can manage quality into a software product," and "software needs more methodologies" that are hard to argue with. You can't, and it doesn't. The next chapter mirrors chapter 2 with some fallacies on the software life cycle. I thought he was unfair in his discussion of the fallacy, "given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow" by saying:
This is probably just wordplay. But it is patently obvious that some bugs are more shallow than others and that that depth does not change, no matter how many people are seeking them. The only reason for mentioning this particular reason here is that too many people treat all bugs as if their consequences were all alike, and we have already seen earlier in this book that the severity of a bug is extremely important to what we should be doing about it. Pretending that turning scads of debuggers loose will somehow reduce the impact of our bugs is misleading at best.
This seems like a deliberate misinterpretation of the idea of the quote. It's not saying that more eyeballs will make bugs less critical. It's saying that any given bug is easier to find if more people are looking for it because the more people that look for the bug, the more likely that a person with the right expertise will see it and be able to fix it quickly. Or it will be more likely that someone looking for the bug will randomly happen to look in the right place and spot its signature quickly. However, I think there are still issues with depending on this approach for open source software development, but for other reasons. Most open source projects don't have the luxury of having hundreds or thousands of programmers working on it. Frankly, most projects are lucky to have more than one programmer working on it, so the responsibility of finding and fixing bugs still falls on the programmer writing the code. Even if the project has high visibility, pull requests need to be of high quality, or more bugs will be introduced over time than will be fixed and the whole project will degrade.

I also took issue with the fallacy in the last chapter: "you teach people how to program by showing them how to write programs." Don't get me wrong, I do think this statement is false, but for different reasons than Glass gave. He thinks it's more important to teach budding programmers how to read code and that academia isn't doing that:
I know of no academic institution, or even any textbook, that takes a reading-before-writing approach. In fact, the standard curricula for the various computing fields—computer science, software engineering, information systems—all include courses in writing programs and none in reading them. 
I disagree on three counts. First, let's get the easy one out of the way. Programming is about more than writing or reading code. Teaching programming involves teaching critical thinking skills, problem solving, systems thinking, user psychology, and so much more! Second, and more directly related to his reasoning, the exact same approach is used in mathematics. Schools teach students how to write math solutions well before teaching them how to read math solutions. Most people will never get to the point of reading and understanding mathematical proofs, but everyone starts with solving basic arithmetic problems. That's how we start in programming, too—by writing basic programs.

Third, I would argue that universities and textbooks are, in fact, teaching students to read programs at the same time as writing them. The examples in the books are all there to read, and the student must read and understand them in order to write their own functioning programs. The first example programs may be short and simple, but I would hardly expect someone brand-new to programming to read hundreds of lines of code without first being taught the syntax. Learning to read is unique in that the student is being taught a skill that is required in order to learn most other skills, so of course we learn to read before we learn to write, but not much earlier. We start learning both in kindergarten, right? Besides, most people don't know how to read effectively anyway, even though they technically learn to read first, so I don't see why a pure reading-before-writing approach to programming would necessarily be better than what is currently being done.

As you can see, some topics in this book are quite controversial, and that's why I really enjoyed it. No one who reads this book will agree with everything, and that's okay. It's meant to raise a debate, and Glass does a great job of presenting a strong case that you can take a stance against if you disagree. It got me thinking over ideas that I've held on to for a long time, and we all need that from time to time. It's also a fairly short book, so there should be no excuse to not read through it. I highly recommend it.

Programming Pearls 2

In the introduction I said this book surprised me, and what I meant by that was that it was not at all the book that I expected. From the title alone, I was expecting a book similar to Facts and Fallacies of Software Engineering in that it would relate a number of experiences and advice from Jon Bentley's career about how to do software development more effectively. I suppose that's what this book is, in a way, but it's more of a combination of an informal algorithms book and a practice set of programming problems.

It's not nearly as thorough or rigorous as Introduction to Algorithms (CLRS) or Algorithms by Sedgewick, but it gives a passable review of most of the fundamental algorithms for sorting, searching, and storing data. The first chapter starts off with an interesting little algorithm that I had never seen before on sorting a list of numbers with a restricted range using an array of bits. In this case it was telephone numbers, and it was accompanied by a story about how he was helping a new colleague with a problem, but the algorithm itself could be useful in plenty of situations. 

The next chapter continued the thread from the first chapter with a few more problems that could be neatly solved with novel algorithms, like finding all possible anagrams or swapping unequal halves of an array. The third chapter covered ways to make programs much more efficient by correctly structuring the data that was being manipulated. The classic example is using an array instead of a set of numbered variables, but Bentley gave other examples as well, like creating a simple template language for form letters. 

Chapter 4 was all about program correctness, using the binary search algorithm as a conduit for discussing the pitfalls of complexity and how to formally verify a program (or at least a function, since formal verification just doesn't scale). The last chapter in this first part of the book quickly covers testing, debugging, and performance timing. That completed the preliminaries, which is what the first part of the book was about, and throughout these chapters Bentley had short, direct advice about how good programming was about balance:
Good programmers are a little bit lazy: they sit back and wait for an insight rather than rushing forward with their first idea. That must, of course, be balanced with the initiative to code at the proper time. The real skill, though, is knowing the proper time. That judgment comes only with the experience of solving problems and reflecting on their solutions.
I think some later writers in the field took this idea of the lazy programmer to the extreme, but I like this nicely moderated perspective more. He had a similarly measured view about performance optimizations:
Some programmers pay too much attention to efficiency; by worrying too soon about little "optimizations" they create ruthlessly clever programs that are insidiously difficult to maintain. Others pay too little attention; they end up with beautifully structured programs that are utterly inefficient and therefore useless. Good programmers keep efficiency in context.
There are no universal answers in programming, so there shouldn't be any universal advice, either. These comments make the point that you can't turn off your brain when programming. You have to constantly consider everything that would have an effect on the problem at hand in order to come to a more optimal solution.

The second part of the book is all about performance. Chapter 6 kicked things off with a look at the n-body problem in physics for simulating the forces that bodies exert on one another. Making the simulation fast was not only about developing a good algorithm, but also using the right data structure, tuning the code for the machine it was running on, and optimizing performance critical loops in assembly. A recurring theme in the book was that there's no silver bullet, and this case study exemplified that with its multifaceted optimization process.

The rest of the chapters in this section expanded on the ideas brought up in chapter 6. Chapter 7 talks about how to estimate with back of the envelope calculations. Chapter 8 discusses various algorithm design techniques including the all important divide-and-conquer approach. Chapter 9 delves into when and how you should do code tuning to get the biggest benefit. Chapter 10 looks at how performance can be improved by reducing space, both of the program code and the data that it operates on. Every chapter had succinct little examples and highly condensed code to show the essence of optimized programs, along with interludes of advice like this:
[E]very now and then, thinking hard about compact programs can be profitable. Sometimes the thought gives new insight that makes the program simpler. Reducing space often has desirable side-effects on run time: smaller programs are faster to load and fit more easily into a cache, and less data to manipulate usually means less time to manipulate it. The time required to transmit data across a network is usually directly proportional to the size of the data. Even with cheap memories, space can be critical. Tiny machines (such as those found in toys and household appliances) still have tiny memories.
It's good to remember that not all programming is done on massively powerful processors, even today with a supercomputer on every desk and in every pocket. We have just as many small processors with limited memory and a tight power budget doing plenty of complex calculation tasks.

That brings us to the last section of the book on five interesting programming problems. The first one is on sorting with quicksort. The second one is about how to draw a random sample from a larger collection. The last three are on searching, heaps, and strings. The last problem dealing with strings was a great way to end because it was actually about how to teach the program how to generate english words and sentences using example material. It was a chapter on machine learning written before it was cool.

On the whole, this book was a fairly enjoyable, quick read. Bentley is clear and to the point, even to the point of being abrupt. As an algorithms book, it's not up to the level of the more formal algorithms books, and it wouldn't be very useful as a first book on that material. It is a good summary of the basic sorting and searching algorithms with some interesting unique algorithms thrown in to spice things up, making it a decent review for the more experienced programmer. If you're looking for an easy second or third book on algorithms to peruse, it's worth picking up.


So it turned out that these two books are not directly comparable, but hey, it happens. They were both enjoyable reads. I would say Facts and Fallacies of Software Engineering was somewhat more enjoyable than Programming Pearls 2 with Glass' way of challenging your assumptions and long-held beliefs, but both books are worth a look in their own right. Programming Pearls 2 does a good job of reviewing the field of algorithms with a few novel ideas thrown in the mix. It all depends on what your interested in at the moment: high-level software engineering issues or algorithmic programming problems.

Esports Summit 2019 @ Atlanta




Dr. Joy Li attended the Esports Summit 2019 held in Atlanta.  The department and college are interested in bringing esports to our campus.  Esports managers are sharing their experience in hosting esports events.

Monday, March 16, 2020

Download Here They Lie For PS4

Download Here They Lie For PS4

PRELUDE | CUSA05344 | Update v1.03 | VR | HACKED


Platform: PlayStation 4
There's something truly terrifying about not having any idea where you are or what you're doing there and not even being able to trust your own eyes. In Here They Lie, part of the horror comes from not knowing if the world is messed up, or if it's just you. The starting area was the scariest for me because everything was so mysterious — as I moved through a train, shadowy figures appeared before me and then vanished. Showing the threat but not actually sending anything my way as I wandered (with smooth movement using the gamepad) through an unfamiliar, labyrinthine subway station was enough to make me tense up quite a bit.







DOWNLOAD

 PRELUDE - Here They Lie - DIRECT LINK


Password: After 10$ payment is done

Sunday, March 15, 2020

Steak, Not Hamburger

"Still Life - 1901" by Pablo Picasso. Art used for criticism under "Fair Use."


I've been told that the image of an average American in Spain is of someone at a baseball game with a hot dog in one hand and a Coke in the other. If this is the case, then I'm no an average American. Hot dogs taste about as terrible as they look, like boiled phalluses (circumcised, clearly). Now, now, I certainly give credit to the, uh, "genius" who figured out how to sell unwanted animal parts by wrapping them up into something Linda Lovelace would swallow. Just forgive me if I resist the impulse to deep-throat wieners every summer. Coca-Cola, on the other hand, resembles battery acid in both appearance as well as tooth decay. The taste is hardly worth getting excited about as far as sodas go. More or less Pepsi under another name. Perhaps if they put the cocaine back in, I'd be more inclined to hold a favorable opinion. Some might argue that this first paragraph could disqualify me from American citizenship. Though I'd argue that it would disqualify me from most Memorial Day barbecues.


It should come as no surprise that I don't have much a taste for hamburgers. It seems that the only American meats my stomach can stomach are steak, pork, and chicken (though even the chicken can elicit occasional bouts of diarrhea). So it goes without saying that hamburgers were among the last things I expected to eat in Spain. Imagine my surprise, then, when I heartily chowed one down for lunch and begged my host mother for seconds.

Truth be told, I didn't know it was a hamburger at first. I often didn't know what kinds of meats went into my sandwiches. Being that I would be living in someone else's home for two months, I avoided being picky about the food. I didn't expect to run into too much trouble here, since I'm an American, and Americans can eat just about anything provided it's properly salted. The Spanish sandwiches I had been used to thus far were either ham, turkey, egg, or pig liver. The latter being among my favorites, if not a tad oily. The hamburger smelled like steak, and tasted about the same, too. When I lauded my host mother for her cooking skills, she revealed the secret identity of my meal. Morgan Le Fey seduced King Arthur by disguising herself as Guinevere, and so too did my nemesis, the hamburger, trick me with false vestments. I'm not an expert on meats, so I couldn't tell you if burgers are prepared differently in Spain than in the United States. I just know that it tasted a hell of a lot better. Speaking of hamburgers, I went to a Spanish McDonald's. To my disappointment, it tasted exactly the same as its American counterpart. Probably about as unhealthy, too.

My host mother was a very skilled cook, I daresay she rivaled my own mother. (And that's saying something!) She made delectable fried potatoes, green peas with ham, tomate y pan, cream of zucchini, fresh clams with rice, and that cold tomato soup, gazpacho. I noticed that the Spanish diet includes a lot of eggs, for every meal and in every dish. Nowhere is this better seen than with the Spanish tortilla. In America, the popular conception of a "tortilla" comes from Mexico, which is a flatbread of ground wheat flour. In Spain, the "tortilla" is a bit closer to an omelet, with some major exceptions. The Spanish tortilla can be produced in any frying pan, it requires a mix of eggs, potatoes, onions, and oil. One can add vegetables or meats at their own pleasure. The closest thing I had had to a Spanish tortilla in the States is quiche. Though I'd venture that the tortilla tastes plenty better, especially with ketchup or salsa.

I also tried my tongue on the foods outside of my home, of course. During a brief festival in Santander, I had the good fortune of eating chorizo and paella. As I write this, I am learning that chorizo is a type of sausage, but it certainly didn't taste like one. (Tongue is not as reliable as I once believed it to be.) The chorizo meat was chopped up and mixed with fries and an egg sunny-side up. Quite spicy, though an attractive snack. Paella, on the other hand, was a savory display of Santander's seafood. Being that the city was by the sea, I'm surprised I didn't come across more seafood, but I won't linger on that. Paella is primarily a rice dish, but mixed in with whatever else is available. I can recall fish and shrimp in the paella I had, but beyond that, it's a blur.

When going to another country, it's a cardinal sin not to try the ice cream. As expected, they have all the common flavors, vanilla, chocolate, strawberry, etc. I first tried out turron, a flavor exclusive to Spain, since it is based on a treat they have during Christmastime. I'll admit, I've never had turron before, but I found that the novelty of turron ice cream wore off and devolved into blandness. I fell in love with lemon, being partial to lemon flavored everything since birth. Though pineapple comes in a close second, it doesn't quite melt into the tongue the way that lemon can. I also got a chance to try out Italian gellato at a shop adorned with photos of my high school muse, Audrey Hepburn (fresh off of the film Roman Holiday). You could have two flavors on your cone, I chose chocolate chip mint and some coffee variant. Then there was the frozen yogurt, which was beyond any cream I had ever tasted in my life. This may sound contradictory, but it had a sourful-sweetness to it.

In Spain, the laws surrounding alcohol are far more lax than those in the States. People under twenty-one can drink their fill and without the pestering need to reveal their ID. There are probably cultural differences to these matters, as Spaniards drink alongside their meals and for social relaxation. Americans drink to get drunk. Though these are crude generalizations, as I'm sure there's many a drunkard in Spain as there is a connoisseur in the States. Yet in Spain, one can sense that society feels a touch more comfortable with alcohol in the streets. I literally drank all night with some friends outside of a church. I think that this comfort can be attributable, in part, to the decreased emphasis on driving in Spain. Most folks in the Iberian Peninsula take buses, ride bicycles, or walk. So there's less a fear of drunk drivers causing mayhem on the roads, and I should add that drunk driving accidents are still a leading killer in the States. I've long bemoaned to myself that the American "drink-until-you-get-wasted" ethic, has spoiled many an opportunity to craft a better relationship with alcohol.

While not exactly a drinker, I wasn't exactly a greenhorn, either. I had tasted wine before in my childhood as a Catholic. We took of it during the communion ritual, in which we believed that during "transubstantiation", the wine was briefly transformed into the literal "blood of Christ." An odd, and frankly, unnerving practice when one really thinks about it. One that veers a tad too close to the dietary habits of one Count Dracula. It reminds me of a humorous scene in David Attenborough's Gandhi. While riding on a crowded train with the young Mahatma, Rev. Charlie Andrews encounters a Hindu who tells him that he knows a Christian woman who drinks blood every Sunday. Andrews appears rather disturbed to hear this, until the Hindu adds that this is the "blood of Christ." This detail relieves him slightly, though the initial shock of the conversation does not seem to have left him. Heavy stuff, too heavy for me. So I started off simple. I drank beer.

Beer was the blood of Homer Simpson, the quintessential American beverage. You'd be forgiven for assuming that I'd fall into it naturally. You'd be forgiven, until seeing my track record with hamburgers and hot dogs. So it goes that America's favorite drink will garner no favor of mine. Beer certainly had an attractive smell, as does vanilla extract, but both are about as flavorless as the underside of my refrigerator. In a word, beer didn't cut it for me. There are variants of cat piss which would make more of an impression. So, seeking a more heightened experience, I went for the heavy stuff. The blood of Christ.

I can't put my tongue on it exactly, but red wine, or vino rioja, has a warm place in my heart. It seems that, like a good woman, red wine fills the body with warm elation, and daresay, presents a brief clarity of the mind. The blood of Christ. I can personally attest to these effects, having read the works of Haruki Murakami and Pope Francis while drinking the elixir in some bars and cafes. Murakami, I will say, felt a bit more of a comfortable choice to be reading in these places. His strange narratives often feature jazz bars of a sort. A motif that, no doubt, came from his experiences running the jazz bar, Peter Cat. The wine helped be absorb them. With each sip, my brain became more receptive to the words on the page, indeed, they flowed through me. Upon returning to the States, I have found this effect to be just as potent. Further, it not only made reading more enjoyable, but film and music as well. Of course, there were other drinks I had that are worth note: strawberry daiquiri, sangria, tinto de verano, and moscato. I have a little anecdote about old moscato. When in the Cafe Alaska, I ordered the moscato in Spanish, though the bartender seemed unfamiliar with it, so I repeated it again and again, but to no avail. It turns out that I had been saying the word mascota, which means pet. I half-expected Alf to come in as a waiter with a cat sandwich. We both had a good laugh after that.

And then I got drunk.

American poet, Ogden Nash, once said, "Candy is dandy, Liquor is quicker." It sure is. In my drunkenness I remembered the Porter from Macbeth who called alcohol a provoker of "nose-painting, sleep, and urine." Further, there was lechery, the Porter adds, "it provokes and unprovokes: it provokes the desire but takes away the performance. Therefore, drink may be said to be an equivocator of lechery: it makes him and mars him; it sets him on and takes him off; it persuades him and disheartens him, makes him stand to and not stand to, in conclusion, equivocates him in a sleep and, giving him the lie, leaves him." Forgive me, I quoted the passage in full, though the first sentence would've sufficed. In my defense, I just wanted to give the reader a colorful illustration of the contradictory and confusing nature of alcohol, though many are already well familiar. In my case, drunkenness was hardly an aphrodisiac, nor did it make my nose red, or my bladder go wild. It succeeded in, for good or for ill, liberating my id from the constraints of my superego. I grew less inclined to think before acting. There was something quite freeing in that, although it made keeping your balance tricky.

It was not my intention to get drunk, but then, that's what they all say, isn't it? I was fresh off of completing Bertrand Russell's Wisdom of the West, in which he spoke fondly of Socrates' self-control, "In all he did he was moderate and has amazing control over his body. Though he rarely took wine, when the occasion arose he could drink all his companions under the table without getting tipsy," (65). I thought at the time, perhaps out of sheer hubris, that I could exercise a similar restraint. I had also determined not to live up to American stereotypes, but rather, model an American founder, one Benjamin Franklin. In his Autobiography, Franklin has a list of thirteen virtues that essentially compromised his philosophical outlook. All the precepts are worth following, but what stuck out to me most was the first one, "Temperance", which states, "Eat not to dullness; drink not to elevation," (104). I tried to follow this edict, and for the most part I was able to, but somewhere along the way, I fell through. I'll try to be more careful with my liquor in the future, though these matters aren't always easy to anticipate. I don't expect them to be.

In my favorite anime, Neon Genesis Evangelion, one of the leading voice actors goes by the name of Spike Spencer. In addition to being an excellent voice actor, Spike is also an expert in dating and travel. While eating in Spain, I often thought back to something he a said about getting a "taste of culture",

"When you're goin' to different places, different countries, and tryin' different foods, that is the best! I always say that is where you taste, when you eat the local food of a place, you're tasting the soul of that place. Because if you think about this: when we move, when we populate an area, why do we populate that area, at any given time? Because that's where you can make food! You know, so whatever's there, in Japan and Asia there's so much rice, because that's kind of there. You don't see a lot of wheat fields. They have a lot of rice. What do we have? We have lots of fields, so we own wheat. So we own a lot of bread and stuff. And, I mean it's that kind of idea, I think food is such a great connector of people. I think it gets down to the very base level. So when you're sharing food with somebody, that you made for them, that's pretty sweet. It shows that you care a little bit more," (YouTube).

I had the privilege of tasting Spanish food, and so, a part of the Spanish soul. It is an opportunity that many do not have, including some who live on the Spanish soil itself. For in Spain, I saw poverty face-to-face. Homeless people sat on the sidewalks, some with small bowls out for collecting coins. I tried to give them what little change I had whenever I could. Though I couldn't always. What shocked me, however, is that whenever I gave, no matter how small the amount, these poor showed immense gratitude. They knew, more than I, what it was like to live without. They knew, better than I, the value of every euro. The euro is not simply a form of currency in the European Union, but a symbol of solidarity and prosperity. Ideals that were put into question by the ongoing economic crisis in Greece. Do these ideals still mean anything to the poor? I can't say.

The shame of inequality is what kept us in different steps of the economic ladder. I began to realize how much of what I am today can be attributed to my wealth. Being a college student, I clearly don't have much of it, but I have far more than they. It's an unfair circumstance, I know, and I have no answers on how to fix it. With what little change I gave, I knew I wouldn't heal their long-term poverty. Yet they still they were hungry. Hunger was an impulse that couldn't wait for economic reforms. My host mother packed me lunches. I gave them half. In the long run, it's a small token, but it beats an empty stomach. I don't where these poor people are today, or if their situations will ever improve. We were strangers then and we are strangers still, yet through the sharing of food, we connected, however briefly.

Through the sharing of food, I showed them, that I cared a little bit more.


Further Reading

"A Fear Of Flying They Call It." http://sansuthecat.blogspot.com/2015/09/a-fear-of-flying-they-call-it.html


Bibliography

Franklin, Benjamin. The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin. Barnes & Noble Books: New York, 1994. p104. Print.

Russell, Bertrand. Wisdom of the West. Rathbone Books, Ltd: London, 1959. p65. Print.

Spencer, Spike. "A Taste Of Culture." YouTube. Web. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLwL9oD1Zek



Thursday, March 5, 2020

Wrong Number, Short Film, Review And Interview


When you have a dream that is so vivid and you are a part of it, is it more than just a dream? Wrong Number provides that level of psychological horror. It brings back memories of our own troubled nights of sleeping.

Wrong Number was screened at the 2019 FilmQuest film festival (website).

I recommend Wrong Number for those who enjoy psychological horror. Delving into the possibilities of someone or something keeping tabs on us.

Synopsis: When a women with a foreboding dream, she must find out its meaning before it's too late.

Tiago Telxeira wrote and directed Wrong Number. Here they share their inspiration for the film along with what inspired them to become a filmmaker. Of course there is more to them than just this film so we also find out what they are working on and what they like to do when they're not looking through the camera or working on a script.

What was the inspiration for Wrong Number?

It was something that happened to me. One night years ago, I woke up in the middle of the night after a bad dream. I was sure I was going to get some terrible news from a phone call. And then the phone rang and I almost had a heart attack. There was no one on the line, but this stick with me for a long time, for obvious reasons.

What project(s) do you have coming up you're excited about?

I'm currently developing my previous shorts into features. I have full scripts and am in talks with some different producers and financiers, so, let's see what will happen next!

What was your early inspiration for pursuing a career in film?

I've always loved film, literature and comics. It took me time to find out what I was more passionate about, and it's definitely film. Maybe growing up on a diet of David Lynch, Carpenter and Cronenberg has helped.

What would be your dream project?

Travelling back in time and directing an episode of Twin Peaks.

What are some of your favorite pastimes when not working on a movie?

Watching strange movies, reading weird fiction, exploring the canals and pubs of London.

What is one of your favorite movies and why?

The Thing. It's the perfect mix between psychological and body horror and in my opinion, John Carpenter's masterpiece.

You can find out more about Wrong Number on IMDb (link).

You can also watch the trailer on Vimeo (link).

I'm working at keeping my material free of subscription charges by supplementing costs by being an Amazon Associate and having advertising appear. I earn a fee when people make purchases of qualified products from Amazon when they enter the site from a link on Guild Master Gaming and when people click on an ad. If you do either, thank you.

If you have a comment, suggestion, or critique please leave a comment here or send an email to guildmastergaming@gmail.com.

I have articles being published by others and you can find most of them on Guild Master Gaming on Facebookand Twitter(@GuildMstrGmng).


Double CoC Play-test For Barbarossa

4 new terrain boards for Mark, 12 feet of canal!
 Spent a terrific day in the company of Mr Freeth and Mr Waple playing a couple of games of Eastern Front CoC in preparation for Mark's forthcoming Barbarossa Big CoC weekends at the WHC later this year, although the first one is only a month away! I still have a few bits and bobs to finish before then (a bit more Soviet infantry and 4 x T26s) but all is in hand.
One of the things we wanted for these games was a canal board - these will also do perfectly for planned France/Belgium/Holland 1940 games, not to mention Holland/Belgium 1944- Mr Waple is also keen to incorporate them into a Carentan scenario. They will also do fine for Mark's massive 20mm set-up.
So, over Christmas I made 12' of canal...that's it really! They had to be on a 12mm ply base to match with the existing boards, so I routed out the channel and some ditches, then built up the towpaths with a further layer of 9mm MDF. The water was just painted brown and then resin poured- I'll have to do a further post really to give a bit more detail- suffice to say I have a little more fine tuning to do on them to match them to Mark's boards, but overall they have turned out ok.  I'm well pleased.

Boards laid out for the game, some new-ish fields in the foreground
 We laid out terrain for a normal CoC scenario, a straightforward 1941 game with a 4 section German platoon with 2 Senior Leaders and a 50mm mortar attacking over the canal against a big 4 section early war Soviet platoon, with their massive sections and a senior leader and an inferior SL + a 50mm mortar. It was an attack /defend scenario, with the Germans having a generous 12 support points and the Soviets 7.
The Germans took a Stug III A (6 points), an Ig18 (4 points) and a preliminary barrage (2 points). The Russian picks (I think) were a BT5 (4 points) and 3 entrenchments (1 point each). Given that the buildings, although numerous, were all flimsy wooden ones only giving light cover the trenches were a wise choice for the Russians. For the Germans, my logic was the Stug is a hefty beast, solid in all departments with both good defensive options and  high offensive capability against both soft targets and any Soviet armour which might appear. The Ig18 gives another 75mm gun with which to hammer the Russians from range, this, in conjunction with the Stug should make it easy. The barrage was a nice bit of icing on the cake to hinder the Soviet deployment.
We played on a 6' x 6' (although we set up a bit more to make the pictures pretty 

The patrol phase for game 1 from the German side. Fields by Hotz matts
 So, onto the 1st game-FM was German 10 - Russians 9. The patrol phase was straightforward enough, The Germans only got a single free move which was disappointing, so we ended up with 2 fairly uniform straight lines across the centre of the table,. It meant the Germans got 3 Jump off points, 2 about 2' in, 1 to the right of the road, behind the barn 1 to the left of the road back behind the rise, and 1 way off to the right. The Soviets dropped all 3 of theirs right back down to their baseline, spread out uniformly giving them access to the ditch and buildings on their side of the canal.

Stug moves up the main road, buildings from Scenic Store pimped by my good self at CAC Terrain
So the German plan was simple enough, batter away with the Stug and the infantry gun from range, then strengthen with the infantry...Didn't quite work out like that.
Both sides were a bit cagey, I got the Stug on early and pushed up the road, the Soviets did very little, and both sides accumulated CoC dice points, as the Stug drew level with the barn, I deployed an infantry section to advance tactically with it, and perhaps draw some fire. They did. 2 Soviet sections deployed in the house by the bridge and in the ditches and opened fire...despite being tactical the big Soviet squads were putting out a lot of fire (more than a German squad) 17 dice iirc, and the german section took a few hits which mounted up fast. There was very little room to deploy another section to put down covering fire, and although the Stug hit back with HE because it lacked an mg it couldn't cover the infantry. Then a BT5 hove into view on the other side of the bridge. The Stug had to redeploy in order to get the BT in its sights (no turret...grrrr). The Russian infantry could carry on firing unmolested. A brief duel took place between the armour, with eventually the Stug coming off best - the BT's main armament getting Ko'd. It scuttled off and reversed behind the house.
 Meantime the Soviets got a couple of double turns, and the German section took more hits, including the Junior leader! he took a round right between the eyes. The German FM took a hit, and the firepower of the Stug just wasn't proving enough to do major damage to the dug in Russians.  

The Stug is given support in the assault on the Bridge. Really excellent rubber cobbled road sections from EWM
 Time for the Germans to up the ante, there now was room for the ig18 to come into play alongside the Stug, 2 x 75mm guns should do a bit more damage, they pounded away for a few phases, but it meant the concentrated fire of 2 sections now went against the little infantry gun...The Russians were simply rolling a lot more dice than the Germans, the casualties began to mount...the gun became pinned, then the JL commanding the gun was wounded- more FM loss, then he's hit again and killed- the gun breaks and the Russians sneakily end the turn with a judicious CoC dice. German FM at this point is 3....not great.
A 75mm Ig18 gives additional fire support. What could go wrong? All models by Warlord, Painted by me!
At this point I decided to call it. The Germans were not going to get over that bridge. Yes, they could plink away with the Stug but it was frankly going to take an age for anything much to happen, and if I deployed any infantry to up the firepower, any BTH roll could be fatal. It was still early in the day and we could get another game in.
Soviet infantry hunker down in the ditch and pour fire into the advancing Germans
 For speed, and rather than re-set terrain we decided to simply re-play the scenario, this time gifting the Germans an extra 2 support points, for a total of 14.
And this is where it all got interesting.
In many rule-sets simply replaying the same scenario with essentially the same forces would result in pretty much the same game, particularly in a scenario like an attack on clearly defined defence line. This is not what happened at all.
FM rolls went German 11 Russian 9- In the patrol phase the Germans got 2 free moves, but it played out fairly similarly however, this time the Germans got a bit further forward, getting a JOP behind the bomb-damaged building on the left.
For the Germans the support picks were very different.I took 2 x Pzr II's at 5 points each and an observer for a mortar battery. The Russians, it transpired swapped it about a bit - A BT (4) and an ATR (2) and a trench.
No hanging about this time, I quickly got on both Pzr II's and they advanced up the road, leapfrogging with one on over-watch as the other advanced, I got a section way out on the right which advanced in the lee of a rise, heading for some hedges. The FO got into the barn next to the road with a good view of the Russian left- any of them popping up to attack the German section there would get pounded by the 81mm battery.
It more or less (ok, less) went like clockwork. The Russians deployed the BT in a cunning spot where it could fire down the road but couldn't be spotted by the second Pzr II which by now was crunching through the gardens on the German left. A little duel ensued with both tanks dealing shock, with little result. As the second Pzr II advanced in order to get a view of the BT5 up popped the ATR in the ditch! it fired! CLANG! the Pzr II ground to a halt- immobilised
Game 2: A different approach, armour heavy, 2 x panzer II's leapfrog up route 1. An infantry section swings right in the distance
I quickly deployed a German section who could put fire down on the ATR, This combined with fire from the Pzr upset the ATR but couldn't get a decisive hit- the ATR fired again- this time disorientating the Pzr's gunner- no activation next phase- it was getting very tense- the BT kept firing at the other Panzer, and scores a winning hit- the Panzer is knocked out but the crew escape- things are looking bad for the Germans yet again.
Finally, the Germans get some hits...a Soviet section has deployed along the river to fire on the Germans hitting the ATR, A firefight ensues, the Germans lose an entire LMG team, The ATR goes down in a hail of cannon fire from the stranded panzer, both FM's are starting to trickle down. The Russians have opened up on their left and are duly met with a brutal mortar barrage, the Russians end the turn, but hadn't realised the Germans held a dice to continue the barrage- The Russians play a second CoC dice and the turn ends but not before the barrage gets a a couple of lucky kills on the Russians.
Infantry attempt to build a base of fire on the left flank. 
 The Germans are trading fire on both flanks,using a mix of covering fire and LMG fire
 on the Russians, the ability of the Germans to use individual teams paying off in the face of the sledgehammer Russian sections. A couple of Soviet  leaders get wounded, the little panzer pouring in cannon fire onto the infantry- finally with yet another Coc dice the BT advances, interrupts and fires on the PanzerII- it misses!
The little German mortar keeps chipping in with the odd hit on the guys in the ditch. The Germans are winning the firefight.

The lead Panzer II dukes it out with the BT5 over the canal while the mortar barrage pounds the Soviet infantry on the right. Bridge is a Sarissa kit.

The Panzer now has a shot at the BT...gets 3 hits- zero saves from the Russians- BOOM! the Russian tank is burning, their FM plummeting. This leaves the panzer free to keep firing at the dwindling section to its front, The FO manages to call in the mortars for a second time which again start to hit the left flank Russians...A brutal lucky hit clobbers a couple more Russians including the JL. and the Russians break- BTH and the suddenly their FM is at zero.....the Germans have done it!
Great fun, a fine time was had by all.
BUT...what really got me thinking was how different the 2 games were. They were both exciting, they both had their moments of tension, but both sides employed similar forces and tactics for both games..yet they were totally different.
It could have been the first game where the power of the Stug prevailed, it could have been that the German mortars had no effect, The BT might have one-shotted the second Panzer...there were a lot of possibilities, and it shows why CoC is such an intriguing game.
Can't wait for the Barborrossa big CoC campaign week-end where the canal will double up as the Kharkov river at some point. In my crystal ball I foresee T34's...and a Soviet counter-attack!
Game 1:Whats left of the first German section cower behind a house, letting the Stug do the work