Categories
Geek / Technical General

Wikis and Collective Knowledge

Wikis are great resources for collective knowledge. Wikis are counter to the culture in which copyright and patent laws encourage scarcity and “mine vs yours” debates. When everyone in the world is involved in a project, you would think it would break down, but they don’t. You would think that defacement would be a huge problem, but it isn’t. Most defacements are caught within minutes on Wikipedia, for instance. Anyone can make changes, but anyone can revert changes as well.

Wikis are great because anyone can make changes. Something missing? Add it! Spot an error? Fix it yourself! It’s open source hacking, but you don’t have to know how to program to participate. You just have to know how to write. It’s been used to document things publicly, such as software projects, but it is also used privately. Supposedly The New York Times used an internal Wiki for its staff.

I’ve contributed to a few Wikis, and I know more changes have been made since then by others. Post a comment and let me know what your favorite Wikis are!

General wikis:
Wikipedia: the free, online encyclopedia
Wike-Wiki: documentation on using Wine
Wiki Science: a Wiki about Wikis?
A Wiki in the Desert: about the game A Tale in the Desert

Game Dev:
Game Programming Wiki
Indie Wiki
Game Programmer’s Wiki
PixelateWiki
UnrealWiki: about the Unreal Engine

Programming:
GCC Wiki: about the Gnu Compiler Collection

Technical:
KDE Wiki: about the popular, open source desktop
Gentoo Linux Wiki: all about the popular Gnu/Linux distro
Linuxquestions.org Wiki: learn all about Linux

Categories
Game Development Geek / Technical Politics/Government

Software Patents? No Thanks!

I just read an article on Gamasutra titled It’s Just a Game, Right? Top Mythconceptions on Patent Protection of Video Games. I am interested in news and articles on software patents, and I’ve always been against them. While I believe patents can cover a physical invention, like a better mousetrap or printing press, I don’t believe patents should cover things like mathematics or intangible ideas.

You want to protect your software? Copyright covers your needs. It’s cheaper, and it’s faster. Trademark will protect anything from logos to specific characters. But patents? Way too expensive. They also bring the software industry to a standstill rather than push its progress along as claimed. Patents are supposed to be granted for non-obvious inventions. Most software patents are for obvious ideas. Anatomy of a Trivial Patent shows how easy it is to make something obvious sound incredibly complex and inventive.

When I read this article, I was hoping to receive information that either supports my view or gives convincing arguments for the opposing view. What I read, however, was lame B.S. about the “merits” of software patents. I will now go through each of these myths getting “busted” throughout the article.

Myth 1:
The first Myth being “busted” here is that you can’t patent computer programs. The truth is, you can patent specific ideas that are used in video games, but the author decides to argue this myth by first pointing out that you can patent the computer/console hardware. Huh? He then gets to the software portion:

  1. “Scoring based on goals achieved and subjective elements” sounds awfully familiar. Oh yeah, it is because most games with scores give you points for doing certain tasks, and the idea that you can get points for doing things in a cool way isn’t all that innovative, is it?
  2. A patent on the use of a machine? Again, not the same argument here.
  3. Sega’s patent on making characters run out of the way of an oncoming vehicle. Something that happens in CARTOONS and real life all the time!
  4. Battlefield strength and morale in a strategy game. Aren’t board games using this mechanic? Couldn’t I just as easily call these elements something else, like “popularity” or “happiness points”?

He also talks about how you can patent the distinct way a logo appears on the screen. These are actually the also-controversial “design patents”. I think trademark would do just fine here. In fact, that’s what trademarks are perfectly suited for because that’s what they were made to protect! Let’s look at the entry in the US Patent database: D487,574 has a list of other design patents that say essentially the same exact thing:
“The ornamental design for an icon for a display screen, as shown and described.”
“The ornamental design for an interface for a display screen for an electronic device, as shown and described.”
“Surface ornamentation for a handheld computer or a computer-generated icon for a handheld computer.”
“Icon for a display screen.”

Aren’t patents supposed to be granted for inventions? What’s so inventive about each of these that the others don’t already have prior art on?

And in any case, at no point is the “myth” that you can’t patent computer programs actually busted. You can patent techniques and algorithms, not whole programs. Nice try, author.

Myth 2:
The argument being made here is that even if you make a clone of a game, you have to have something unique about it, right? Patent that unique thing!

I create a power-up that makes the entire screen turn upside-down. Is that really going to be considered patentable?

Myth 3:
This argument says that while a patent might take a long time, you can get provisional rights, giving your application power even if your patent isn’t approved yet. Also, there is this quote:

Additionally, this may be another example of selling yourself short. Many inventions are broader in scope than the particular embodiment first produced by the inventor, and a good patent attorney can help an inventor identify the true, full scope of the idea that has been invented.

No, a good patent attorney can help an inventor identify the wording to make an otherwise specific “invention” cover a broad range of other “inventions”. You can patent “a mechanism for keeping point totals in order” and now you control the Top 10 List, but if you patent “a mechanism for displaying data in an arbitrary order” you have now patented not only the Top 10 List, but also end-game statistics for all kinds of games. Essentially, the author here is trying to convince you that there is a lot of money to be made by making your “invention” as broad as possible to cover as many possibilities as possible.

Myth 4:
Suing is expensive. The author ignores that point by arguing that patents are used for more than simply suing. Fine. But this line:

A patent portfolio is also a good defensive tool. Competitors, who will no doubt take advantage of the patent process for themselves, will think twice about suing you if there’s a threat of you suing them back (i.e., a countersuit).

Yeah, I’m sorry. No. If IBM, Microsoft, or probably even EA decides to sue you, your single, measly patent isn’t going to do anything. These companies will likely claim that your patent is actually making use of one of their patents. Imagine coming into a water-balloon fight with a pack of balloons, and the opponent holds the only water hose to fill them. That’s what it is like. IBM has argued that its huge patent portfolio is a great set of assets not because they receive licensing revenue, but because IBM can write whatever software it wants. NO ONE can go to IBM and say, “Hey, you’ve infringed on my patent, so give me money!” because IBM will return with, “YOUR patent makes use of any number of the thousands of patents we have. You can go away now. Oh, and you’ll also let us license your patent at no real cost to us. Have a nice day.”

Myth 5:

The “spirit of innovation” works best when there is a free market of ideas, and consumers are better off if video games are not patented.A classic argument among those who feel that the entire patent system should be abolished. You might want to make that argument to your representative in Congress, because unless the Constitution is amended to do away with patents, they’re here to stay.

The quote above is one of the examples that really showed that this article wasn’t meant to be informative so much as to persuade through deceit. One, people aren’t arguing to abolish the entire patent system. People are arguing that certain types of patents, specifically software patents, shouldn’t exist. The second statement implies that the Constitution already mentions patents, when it doesn’t. The Constitution grants the power to create ways to reward people for progress, but doesn’t create any specific power, like copyright or patents.

The patent system changes. So does copyright. It isn’t a far stretch to think that some changes are better than others, and some changes are just plain bad. The ability to patent software is one such change.

In the last paragraph for this “myth buster”, he talks about Ralph Baer, who supposedly gets credit as the father of video games. Don’t most people believe that Nolan Bushnell did it first? In fact, the author mentions Pong, which is technically Bushnell’s game. Bushnell opted out of a patent infringement suit by Magnavox because Pong was based on Baer’s more complex Ping-Pong game. Other companies lost lawsuits, and Magnavox made a lot of money. The author then mentions that Spacewar was created by Steve Russell.

Unfortunately for him, Russell did not seek patent protection on his concept, and did not document his development efforts as well as Baer. We will never know how history may have been rewritten had Russell sought patent protection on Spacewar. The moral of the story is simple: you should act to protect your inventions.

It sure sounds like it. Baer makes millions, and Russell failed. No, wait. Let’s remember who Russell was. A programmer at MIT. He made the first game that would be distributed with the computers being used at the time, which were mainframes. Trading programs wasn’t called piracy back then. It was called sharing. And you did so with tape, not disks. No one downloaded anything over p2p networks.

Russell was a student, and he hacked just for fun on the new DEC PDP-1. No one at the time thought to make money by selling software, let alone games. So Russell wasn’t trying to make money off of his game. Once again, the author is trying to convince you that software patents are great by offering up hints of ideas that you will hopefully turn into facts in your mind. I know the story, and so I knew that this comparison was horribly contrived and the language implied something that isn’t true. How many people know about Steve Russell and Spacewar? How many people reading this article would think that Russell “failed” with his game while Baer succeeded with “his” Pong?

If that specific paragraph in the author’s article doesn’t convince you that this author is trying to sell you something, I don’t know what will.

Myth 6:
Patents are expensive. The research prior to filing may be cheaper than ever, but the filing of a patent costs serious money. Maybe EA can afford to pay the thousands just to patent games, but indie developer budgets can easily double or triple due to filing costs. Don’t forget that if you have to sue or defend yourself, your lawyers will cost money too. Not everyone will make millions by suing people who make card games.

In the end:

Video game innovations will play a large role in determining who shares in the ever-growing multi-billion-dollar video game industry. As more and more companies enter the market, and spend more and more resources developing those innovations, protecting those innovations will become even more critical.

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Back up a bit here. If the Constitution grants the power to create things like copyright and patent laws to promote innovation, and more companies are entering the market and creating things, do we need MORE protection? Doesn’t this just contradict everything the author himself was saying? Patents allow for progress. There is more progress. Therefore, we need to “protect” progress? From who or what are we protecting our “inventions”? The author doesn’t say. The implication, of course, is that other people will take your “invention” and start making money from it, and you need to protect yourself.

We don’t need software patents to make software. Software patents don’t promote progress. They stifle it. Most software patents are being used defensively. Microsoft, IBM, and others trade licenses, and no real lawsuit gets completed anymore. “You can make use of our XOR patent if we get the right to use your patent on computer animation with color.” Not everyone is Microsoft or IBM, and so not everyone would benefit from software patents. The only real reason given in the article is to do it because everyone else is doing it. Get them before they get you.

Software innovation happens in spite of software patents, not because of it. If everyone who wrote software had to do a lengthy patent search before writing code or releasing projects, how many projects would be dead due to IBM alone? As the author explains, ANYTHING can be patented, so it isn’t like software patents are documenting actual inventions.

Software patents don’t protect anyone but large companies. They are expensive. They cover ideas, algorithms, and mathematics when patents are supposed to cover actual inventions. And even more important, the author was clearly trying to deceive rather than provide actual information. Can someone give REAL arguments for software patents? It doesn’t seem so. Most arguments “for software patents” tend to sidestep the issue and claim that patents are doing what they always do. Such arguments ignore the fact that software development is not like building vehicles, and they ignore the actual question: should software patents exist?

I believe they shouldn’t.

Some links:
League for Programming Freedom
Paper arguing that software patents would actually reduce innovation and progress (PDF format)

Categories
General Personal Development

Barriers to Success

Top Barriers Limiting You From Your Dream Job is an article that is making its way around the blogs. It’s a good reminder that it is very easy to make excuses for not accomplishing anything. Lack of time, fear of change, obligations, and the fear of being wrong are among the 10 items listed.

I really wish that I had learned years ago that “I didn’t have enough time” is not a valid excuse. Today I know that a lack of time isn’t really a lack. Every day has 24 hours. Every day is the same. If I didn’t have time to do something specific, the problem is more about my lack of committment and action plan than about the lack of a 25th hour. I didn’t really do a lot of game development these past two weeks. Is it because time went by quicker? No, it is because I let other things take up the time I would normally dedicate to development. Playing Wizardry 8, for instance. B-)

On another note, the human imagination is amazing. As children, we used the imagination to play games or pretend to be something bigger than we are. We’re super heroes! We’re firefighters! We’re saving the princess! Making the world a better and safer place!

As adults, most people use their imagination to worry. It’s always used to worry about the negative consequences. Imagination is rarely used to explore opportunities. I think that the fear of being wrong is just another symptom of the problems of “acting your age”.

Today, there are so many paths to success. Allowing any of these 10 barriers to prevent you from being great would be a tragedy.

Categories
Games Politics/Government

Violent Video Game Ban Passed in Illinois House

I read this article in the Chicago Sun-Times. Apparently the Illinois House passed the law 100-6.

Someone on the Indie Gamer forums posted a link to the FTC study that gets cited a lot by the Governor. Let’s look at the findings:

Ability of a minor to purchase an Electronic Game: 85% in 2000, 78% in 2001, and 69% in 2003
Ability of a minor to purchase a DVD: no data available in 2000 or 2001, but 81% in 2003.
Ability of a minor to purchase a movie theater ticket: 46% in 2000, 48% in 2001, 36% in 2003.

Now, this study only shows whether a minor was able to make the purchase. It never details whether or not such purchases are being made normally, so there is no indication that there is a problem in the first place.

But remember, the Senior Advisor to Governor Blagojevich says “Whether such inappropriate purchases are part of a widespread problem or not, this administration thinks that no child should be able to purchase these types of video games without his or her parents’ supervision.”

That’s a perfectly valid point to make. If you believe that children shouldn’t be able to purchase violent video games at all, then that’s fine. But all the studies cited make mention of television and movies. Are inappropriate purchases of DVDs not as bad? 81% is a LOT. Even if it isn’t part of a widespread problem, should children be allowed to buy R-rated DVDs? Apparently so. And at 36%, it is clear that the movie industry isn’t the great self-regulater that it’s made out to be. 36% is a LOT, and the Governor’s office has made it clear that there shouldn’t be ANY minors buying inappropriate video games.

And there you go. “Protecting the children” sounds all well and good, but it is not consistent with the actions of the government. I’m sure you’ll forgive me for not believing that it is the goal of such legislation to actually protect children. If it were, then the laws would do something meaningful at the very least. You don’t cite studies saying that television, movies, and video games have an effect on children, but then only show outrage at the popular scapegoat of the year.

Categories
General

Open Source Business Models

Forbes.com’s article “The Open Source Heretic” is about Larry McVoy, the CEO of Bitmover, and his comments on how open source business models are not sustainable.

Bitmover makes BitKeeper, a version control system system ideal for distributed developers. The Linux kernel currently uses it, and it has been given to the open source community to use free of charge. Until now. Apparently some developers wrote add-ons for the product, but doing so is in violation of the licensing terms. After arguing with some members of the development group, McVoy decided that he wouldn’t provide free support anymore. For more info, see Red Herring’s “An End to Free Linux Support”.

Anyway, McVoy made a lot of comments in the Forbes article regarding open source business models. Nothing truly innovative comes from it. If you take away the hardware companies that are funding most open source developers, the model fails. He can’t think of any way that open source can fund itself…

And though open source software may be “free,” sometimes you get what you pay for, McVoy says. “Open source software is like handing you a doctor’s bag and the architectural plans for a hospital and saying, ‘Hey dude, if you have a heart attack, here are all the tools you need–and it’s free,'” McVoy says. “I’d rather pay someone to take care of me.”

Oh! Oh wait! What’s this?! One of those business models! McVoy, you’re a genius! Since most people don’t give a damn about the code, and they don’t care to learn, and if they are willing to PAY for someone else to do it for them, THAT’s a business model. There is a demand, and you supply it. Huh. Who’d have thunk it?

I didn’t like how the Forbes article kept insinuating that “open source” means you have to give away your code for no cost. For instance, I use Debian as my distro of choice, and I use many of the packages. I only get the source for something when I explicitly ask for it. With Debian and most distros, I can get the source independent of the binary, but legally Debian doesn’t have to provide the source unless they provided me a binary for code under the GPL.

There are other business models. Dual licensing works wonders. Just ask Trolltech about their Qt library. Or id, which gives away the source to their old game engines and yet doesn’t find people trying to redistribute the original and proprietary Doom game data with the source code. There are embedded devices running open source, and I’m sure those hardware manufacturers aren’t too keen on going back to running proprietary and expensive operating systems. Zope was way more successful after the source was released than before it.

Support. Consulting. Custom development. Web services. Hosting. For some reason these are supposed to be the exclusive domain of software that is not open or Free? Right.

Once again, “FOSS” is not mutually exclusive with “commercial. “McVoy understands open source as well as anyone on the planet”, according to the Forbes article because his non-open source was used by many open source developers. While it is possible for someone who is against FOSS business models to be an expert on it, I’m a bit skeptical. Time and time again we’ve found that Coca-Cola isn’t exactly an expert on drinking patterns when they release drinks like “New! Lemon-Lime-Grapefruit-Extreme-Diet Coke”, and yet lots of soft drink drinkers use their products.

Categories
Geek / Technical General

Support for Gnu/Linux Systems

People who use Windows have a couple of huge advantages over people who use Gnu/Linux: games and hardware/service support.

Defeating the no-help desk is an article on Newsforge that talks about how to get around tech support that isn’t helpful if you run something other than what is explicitly supported.

What you should never reveal

Many call centers bill by the call, so they are focused on the number of calls they complete, not the number of problems solved or the degree to which customers are satisfied. In these situations, the phone support person you’re calling has one duty: to get you off the phone as fast as possible without breaking the rules. There may not be as much concern for whether your problem is solved as you’d like. That means that the support person’s first strategy may be to find a reason why he cannot help you. If so, your response should be to eliminate every reason that he might have to end the call.

I’ve worked part-time at a help desk for a few years. In the beginning the goal was to solve problems. Near the end of my employment I was told by someone that the new goal was to get off the phone within two minutes. I wasn’t told in an official way, so I didn’t pay attention to it. What I found was that I was making a lot of people happy by actually solving their problems, especially after others might have gotten them off the phone fairly quickly.

But this post is not about poor service. This post is about support issues when running Gnu/Linux.

A lot of companies have a policy of not supporting anything but users running Windows and maybe Mac OS X. Sometimes this policy makes sense, such as ActiveX controls or DirectX issues. Fine.

How about ISPs? They provide a network connection, and NOTHING about the operating system you use should matter. Yet if you don’t run exactly what they require, you’re out of luck. In my area, I had a choice between cable and two DSL providers. I asked questions. The general idea:

Cable company: “We offer one package. You can use one computer. It must run Windows.”
Local phone company’s DSL: “We offer PPPoE, so it isn’t always on, you must login to use it each time, and we require you to run Windows.”
Speakeasy DSL: “We give you a network connection. So long as it isn’t illegal, you can do whatever you want with it.”

Speakeasy was way more expensive than either of the other options. I went with Speakeasy anyway. I don’t have to pay extra for each machine on my network. I don’t have to pretend to be using a different OS. I don’t have to lie. I also get very knowledgeable tech support whenever something goes wrong. When I move into a new place, I am making damn sure I get Speakeasy again.

Similarly, if hardware fails, the fact that I am using Gnu/Linux shouldn’t matter. A bad hard drive is a bad hard drive. A fried motherboard or CPU is just that. No, I highly doubt that the fact I was running Firefox instead of IE matters. I don’t think that Gnu/Linux use prevents someone from replacing the CD drive. At this point, drivers don’t matter. The fact you don’t support the use of the device under Gnu/Linux doesn’t matter. Imagine telling someone using Windows that a failed hard drive can’t be supported because Service Pack 2 isn’t supported or the use of non-Microsoft products on the system voids the service support contract.

Well, in that case, there might be enough people that think that they have no choice in the matter and give up. They’re used to it by now. People have been conditioned to be afraid of the computer. If something goes wrong, they are conditioned to believe that it is their fault and nothing can be done. “We don’t support it” is simply translated as “Do exactly as we say or else you lose all of your photos and term papers!!”

I like computers. I am not intimidated by technology. I made sure I was knowledgeable enough to have a choice. I didn’t like the idea of Microsoft’s Activation, so I made Gnu/Linux my main operating system. These days it is easier than ever for people to do this switch, especially with distros like Knoppix, Ubuntu, and others. Unfortunately, “we don’t support it” forces people to stay with an otherwise lacking system like Windows. “My digital camera won’t on Gnu/Linux?” “I just paid $300 for this printer and there are no drivers for it?!” “I have to run Windows just to check my email?!?”

So there are a few options to get support:

  • Keep Windows around, either on a second machine or a dual boot configuration.
  • Lie about what you’re using, requiring that you’re knowledgeable.
  • Not use the service or hardware.

Some people find one or more of the options unbearable. Hardcore Free Software people wouldn’t want to use Windows nor would they want to lie about what they use. Others would be hard pressed to do without the service or hardware. Either way, everyone loses.

Categories
Games General

Video Game Manifestos

I found A Gamer’s Manifesto at Game Girl Advance. It’s humorous and hits home. I’ve always had Nintendo systems so I never really dealt with long load times before, but PC Games and apparently Playstation and XBox titles are plagued by developers who think that long loading times are great. Another valid complaint is the invisible barrier that keeps you within the game map. With the power of game platforms these days, couldn’t the map itself keep you within its boundaries? If I am going to hit the edge of the map as if it was a normal wall, why not make it a normal wall? Or some other suitable obstacle?

Other famous video game manifestos:

Categories
Geek / Technical

MAKE: 10 Things to Do With Old PCs

People have been fairly excited about the new Make magazine. From the page:

The first magazine devoted to digital projects, hardware hacks, and D.I.Y. inspiration.

They actually have a blog where they post interesting projects. Today I found an entry on 10 Things to Do With Old PCs. I was amused that out of all of the cool things they mentioned, “Install Linux” was simply one option and not a preprequisite for most of them. B-)

I’ve been using a home network for some time and it was a great learning experience. As a gamer, LAN parties are a semi-normal part of life, and setting up LANs is second-nature now. My main system is my multimedia center, and I am interested in making a DVR. I run my own webserver and file server. I even make automated backups across the network.

Sure, none of it “requires” you to use Gnu/Linux. Windows is currently much preferred for LAN parties due to the number of games it has. Still, what’s the point of tinkering with an old box if you aren’t trying to learn something? And isn’t it easier to learn how an engine works when it is visible? When you can take it apart and put it back together again? One of the big things that appealed to me about Gnu/Linux was that it was hackable, meaning that I could mess with it all I wanted without worrying about some violation of a draconian EULA.

Make obviously needs to cater to as many customers as it can, and most people run Windows in some form. Still, I can’t help wondering how much easier it would be to setup a central repository for files or create a personal website for your LAN when running Gnu/Linux. It would also be cheaper since you would technically have to buy a license for Windows in order to run it on the new member of your computer family. You’ll be hard pressed to find an older version of Windows that would run on an older machine, so be prepared for potentially expensive hardware upgrades just to meet minimum specs. Some Linux-based distros, on the other hand, can run on machines that gave Windows 98 problems, and most distros will run on the low-specs described in the article. Since you don’t need a per-machine license, you can even create your own Beowulf cluster if you have multiple old machines.

Categories
Game Development Games Geek / Technical

Out of Touch with Games

I’ve been meaning to post about how I am out of the loop when it comes to mainstream games these days. Wario Ware? I still haven’t seen it, but apparently it is huge. I didn’t see the Nintendo DS in action until a few weeks ago. In fact, I haven’t seen the PSP. Lumines? Wipeout? I haven’t seen the Game Boy Advance SP except in other people’s hands.

I wanted to check out Prince of Persia: Sands of Time a few months ago, but it was sold out. I ended up getting Metroid Prime, which is definitely a fun game, but my keyboard/mouse hands can’t remember how I used to play Goldeneye 64 with a passion. I bought Civilization III months ago because it was at impulse-buy range (under $15). I still haven’t pulled the cellophane off of it. I’m only now considering purchasing Unreal Tournament 2004, which got to the top of me and my friends’ want lists because it was available for Linux out of the box (thank you, Epic! I’ll thank you with my dollars soon).

In the meantime, there has been new a Metroid game, a new SimCity(how did THAT escape my attention?!) and an expansion pack for Doom 3. Nintendogs was out. Nintendo was announcing a new game console. All of these things were news to me way after they should have been.

I used to be on top of Nintendo-related news since I had a subscription to Nintendo Power. Last year I realized that I wasn’t playing Nintendo games as much so I gave it up, but now I find myself surprised that other people know about things before I do. I used to be the GOTO guy for Nintendo trivia and knowledge!

And regarding PC games: I just don’t have the time to play all the games I currently have, let alone buy new ones. I loved Homeworld Cataclysm, but I wasn’t going to buy Homeworld 2 since the demo didn’t impress me that much. Dungeon Siege? Sounded cool, but I wasn’t really compelled to play it. Black & White’s expansion didn’t end up in my collection even though I loved the original.

Am I really capable of making good games if I don’t even play many of the existing games? You can’t become a good writer without reading a lot of books, and I think you can’t make good games without playing a lot of games. The good games will inspire, and the bad ones will acts as sign posts, warning the intrepid developer about what not to do and where not to go.

Clearly, I have some improving to do.

Categories
Personal Development

It’s My Fault I Bought A Bad Product

I talked previously about how I enjoyed listening to the audio book “100 Ways to Motivate Yourself” by Steve Chandler. I really liked how much I learned from listening to a tape while driving. So I recently bought another audio book called “Develop a Super Memory Auto-matically”. I didn’t know about it previously, but I saw it when I was at Barnes & Noble. I’m interested in learning how to remember things more consistently and clearly.

This audio book, however, was not one I should have bought. Here is a break down on how the tape runs:

  • “Hi, welcome to the tape. First, to increase your memory, stop saying you have a bad memory. You need to believe you can have a good memory.”
  • Lame music with positive affirmations you’re supposed to repeat to yourself.
  • “Forgetting someone’s name isn’t because of bad memory but because you weren’t paying attention or focused.”
  • Lame music with positive affirmations you’re supposed to repeat to yourself.
  • Fake conversation with other host: “I can remember student names within the first hour of a new class.” “Wait a minute, Bob, are you blah blah blah blah seriously?” “Why, yes, Diedre, blah blah blah I’ll give you the secret but first let’s have more positive affirmation time.” “Ok!”
  • Lame music with positive affirmations you’re supposed to repeat to yourself.
  • “The secret…No, wait, just a description of the secret’s results. Let’s take an affirmation break.”
  • Lame music with positive affirmations you’re supposed to repeat to yourself.

And so on. I plan on finishing the tape, even though the big secret isn’t really a secret. I’ve read about associating a number with a specific item, such as 1=T/Tea, 2=N/Noah, 3=M,May, etc. And I’ve read that making absurd images and using other senses help you to remember. If anything redeems itself, it is the fact that the tape talks about this “memorizing lists” technique in a more natural pace than what I’ve read. I can actually see myself making use of this technique.

Still, it’s an audio tape. If I feel the need to reaffirm that I have the ability to remember things, I’ll rewind to listen to an “affirmation break” from the beginning. I don’t need it strewn throughout the tape, interrupting the flow of learning. What really ticked me off was hearing the author say something like, “We usually use 30 items, but due to time constraints, we’ll only use 16.” Time constraints?! Maybe if you didn’t waste most of the tape with affirmations, you would have more time!

I’m fairly upset about it, but I have to realize that it is my fault that I wasn’t informed. In an age where reviews of any product by anyone in the world are easily available, I made a reckless purchasing decision. I would have seen that other people were also turned off by the repeated and mostly unnecessary affirmation breaks. I say mostly because I can see why the affirmations would be useful. Believing you can remember things well is necessary to learn how to remember things well. Still, did we really need to go through the affirmation breaks so many times?

I will no longer make impulse purchases without knowing something about the product first. I will probably pick up Mega Memory next time.