Oct 21, 2009

Swine Flu vs Prisoner's Dilemma

Swine Flu is a moral dilemma much akin to the Prisoner's dilemma on a huge scale. To understand this, I need to assume you know the basis of the hype for the Swine Flu. It is less deadly in its current form then the generic flu. Swine Flu's strains change at an alarming rate, and it is quite contagious.

The Prisoner's Dilemma is as follows from Wikipedia
Two suspects are arrested by the police. The police have insufficient evidence for a conviction, and, having separated both prisoners, visit each of them to offer the same deal. If one testifies (defects from the other) for the prosecution against the other and the other remains silent (cooperates with the other), the betrayer goes free and the silent accomplice receives the full 10-year sentence. If both remain silent, both prisoners are sentenced to only six months in jail for a minor charge. If each betrays the other, each receives a five-year sentence. Each prisoner must choose to betray the other or to remain silent. Each one is assured that the other would not know about the betrayal before the end of the investigation. How should the prisoners act?
How is this like Swine Flu? The people that get infected (yes, I understand few to none of them do it on purpose) have some basic resistance against Swine Flu. The more people that get infected, the greater the chance that the Swine Flu will gain a deadly strain. The people that have already have had Swine Flu are more likely to survive a pandemic of that deadly strain.

Armed with the knowledge that the current strain is rather survivable and are a vaccine from the wild, and future strains may not be easily survived, would you be more likely to cause yourself to become infected to gain resistance against a future deadlier string?

I probably should note here that IANAD.

Oct 8, 2009

Bomberman Ultra (PS3 DL) - QA

This is a list of QA problems I've found with Bomberman Ultra. I try to hold my opinion's out of this as much as possible, and only point out bugs. Opinion's are in italics. If you'd like to contribute to this list, either contact me via the Contact section, or comment on this post.


  • A player can halt a multiplayer game from getting hosted by sitting in a game room without hitting x (confirming they are ready to play).
  • A system locks down in one of these scenarios (I'm not entirely sure which one happened):
    • Host/player leaves game, or powers off their remote system
    • Bad connection causes lag out
    During lock down, nothing on the controller has an effect on the game (game movement, start, PS3 Home button press/hold). Powering down the system by holding the console's power button was needed. I waited just short of a minute for any interaction. Even if there is an out for this scenario, 5 seconds is too long to disallow any controller actions.


  • The costumes pieces are unlocked by a profile's player slot numbers. Eg. This profile's player slot 2 has to unlock each of it's costume pieces separately than slots 1, 3, and 4. It is now my understanding that profile per player is a PS3 system problem. Get your act together Sony!
  • Local play is unable to customize player costumes. This can be worked around by going into Multiplayer, in which the other player slots may customize their bomber for Local play.
  • It would be better for only unlocked pieces to be shown. Taken a step further, for each sphere picked up, one is given a choice among three pieces to add to their collection. Eg. Player has collected 3 spheres since she last looking at the custom costume screen. She is shown three random locked pieces, and gets to keep one. This process is repeated twice more, each time three new random pieces shown.


  • Extra players signed in on a single console are stuck with player one's profile name. Loading other profiles isn't possible. Is this not possible at the machine level? I don't recall a single multi profile game on PS3.