Joe, do you know if Thorne's stuff is real? Or is it purely made up, a la Tucker Max?

 

***** of fuking steel

 

Why do you need to undo your belt to pee?

 

Cause my dick is too large to snake it through the zipper.

 

How come you're not twin-charged FailFlora?

 

 

I loled.


Thorne gives Handler too much credit.

Seriously, Ella thinks a slutty comic who drinks a lot, drives drunk, does drugs, and fvcks everything with skin has more intrinsic value than David Thorne?

never!

 

Well, he's a professional writer and satirist (meaning he has the mind of a seven year old), so I've always assumed that they're perhaps inspired by real-world events and then massively exaggerated.

 

The executable that produced this is 64k bytes. For the computer illiterate, that is really ------- small in todays world of $75 1 terabyte external drives that are small enough to fit in your hand.
Perspective:
You could fit 20 copies of it on a standard 3.5" floppy disk and have some space left over.
A .png screenshot of the youtube player (in standard size, not fullscreen) is about 6.5x larger than the program itself.

------- crazy.

 

That's pretty interesting (and props.) I'd kind of lost track of the demo scene after I got out of the Amiga platform.

Rummaging around the Pouet site makes me rather curious about something. For instance, this demo was in the 4k category:



(For the non PC-literate, 4k is about the amount of information that will fit on two typewritten 8.5x11" sheets of paper. It's a staggeringly tiny amount of data.)

I just can't buy it. These demos have got to be downloading large amounts of information at runtime. How is that not cheating?

 

fractals make my boner hurt

 

Depends on how you define 4k. If I get to use libraries -and- have 4k of code, I could do that in 8k guarenteed, probably 4k myself. I don't see any evidence of that demo using textures, it appears to be entirely generated from geometric shapes defined in the code and sent out to a hardware renderer.

 

I'm pretty sure part of the requirement is that it is all generated, i.e. no downloading textures/data.

 

I'm just trying to comprehend how you could even define a single strawberry in 64k, much less render it, much less render it in the middle of a large garden filled with lots of things that aren't also strawberries. With music.

 

Depends on the library and/or sound hardware as to size for music.

As an example, I've done a full length song (~4 minutes) in about 2KB with full instrumentation using a MIDI format. The songs that are used in the 4kb and 64kb demos are incredibly simple, and would likely weigh in at a tenth of that or less I would imagine.

The single strawberry in 64k...I think I have a handle on how they did it in so small of a size.

I.e. shape Strawberry
{
Geometric points here defining the shape and reflective characteristics
}

render(Strawberry, screen location)

It would not surprise me at all that they could manage to display a strawberry in a couple hundred bytes at the most, if you exclude the render code.

 

 

noise.

 

Yeah, I understand how vector-based environment description languages work (I used to play with POVray back in the 286 era, and that was all text-based.)

I'm just looking at the huge diversity of objects in the video, and the high level of detail in each one (lots of polygons) and thinking that the description of all of the various objects in that environment seems like it'd take more than 64k, to say nothing of the renderer.

 

 

I might actually have to watch this when it`s finally been enhanced in SUPER 3D