[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Card Playing Protocol?
[email protected] writes:
>Find a _reason_ to use crypto in games...
Easy. Three quick ones.
1) If you like nice distributed "I don't need no stinkin' trusted
server" ways of doing things, it is the only way to play some virtual
games.
2) Games are very important. (Quick: Name 10-industries which are
bigger. ... Betcha ya made at least one mistake.)
3) A simple game of cards is very non-threatening. It doesn't smack
of anarchists or revolutionaries or anything frightening like that.
Those words scare a lot of people. This is politics man, these things
matter.
Tim also writes:
>An obvious problem with crypto card games is this: what does it
>provide that is worth the extra effort of doing encryption?
I admit I originally considered a situation where the user actually
saw the crypto elements in action, I have since convinced myself that
is silly. At least in the case of doing cards, too complicated.
Seeing the results is pretty powerful, however.
Also, remember who suggested this (today): I am a user interface
freak. The effort is in the protocol, the user never sees it, she
only notices that she can now be part of the World Wide Duplicate
Bridge Tournament that she heard about on All Things Considered.
The effort in building the protocol? I love that stuff.
The effort in writing the software? I like that stuff somewhat--but
there is possible *profit* here, I might not have to write more than
the crude 0.9 version. Some game company might finally bring down
ITAR. (Now that is economic might.)
The effort in CPU time or communication bandwidth? Shit! We are
talking a world of digital video, for christsakes! What's a few
computrons and bauds burnt to deal a hand of go-fish?
Is there a flavor of effort I forgot?
-kb
--
Kent Borg +1 (617) 776-6899
[email protected]
[email protected]
Proud to claim 32:00 hours of TV viewing so far in 1994!