Showing posts with label player. Show all posts
Showing posts with label player. Show all posts

Friday, March 18, 2011

Why Angry Birds +could+ turn into a major identity player

LeWeb 2010

Right now when I want to share my identity with a new service, I usually turn to Facebook. Why?

1. It knows my social graph (IE, the people who I want to be associated with online).
2. It has an identity API (IE, when I sign into, say, CinchCast, that has a way to talk to Facebook and get info from me).
3. It knows a lot about me, including what kind of music, what movies, what website, what drinks, what activities, what food, and more, that I like.
4. I keep it up to date because of social pressure of other members (if you change your email, for instance, watch what happens if you don’t change your address — people bug you).
5. Me, and nearly everyone I know, is on it.

So, right now how does Angry Birds compare?

1. Doesn’t have it.
2. Doesn’t have it.
3. Doesn’t know it.
4. Oh, yeah, we play every day.
5. Oh, yeah, the other day I walked into my doctor’s office with my son and literally EVERYONE in the office was playing Angry Birds. Old. Young. And others.

Now I have some inside knowledge. I was talking with an exec who works at Rovio the other night at the DLD conference and he hinted that Angry Birds would be turning on a gaming network soon.

Why? Well, what’s the worst thing about Angry Birds? That when you get to a new level on one device, all your other devices don’t know about it.

But, let’s take it further. Angry Birds could prompt you to give up a lot of the information Facebook does today. Why? They would trade you “Angry Birds points” for knowing what kind of books you read. Or what movies you’ve seen lately. Or what beer you like drinking.

It could even open up new levels for players that shared a lot of info with the system.

Yesterday I was in a workshop for Lufthansa where they asked us to build a “Facebook airline.” It was amazing to hear how willing the high-mileage travelers in the room were to give up their personal data to have better service.

Would I join an Angry Birds social graph? Damn straight I would and I’d probably urge you to join up too.

It isn’t hard to see how they would become the coolest social network within a month or two. Even cooler than Quora. Heheh. After all, a lot more people identify with Angry Birds than identify with other services online (the same exec told me they can’t keep Angry Birds merchandise in stock).

Maybe this is the competition Facebook needs. Diaspora? Give me a break, that will never keep Facebook honest. Angry Birds, though, could become a major competitor for Facebook and could keep them worried about their future existence, the way Facebook is now keeping Google’s founders up at night.

What do you think? And, if you don’t like it, just pretend I’m a pig and send some of those birds my way!

WWWwwwwwwhhhhhhhhhhheeeeeeeeeeeee!

Photo credit: Loic Le Meur at LeWeb 2010 By Hervé Corcia.


View the original article here

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Computer has a go and beats pro player

Sorry, I could not read the content fromt this page.Sorry, I could not read the content fromt this page.

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Computer has a go and beats pro player

I've just read over on Slashdot that a supercomputer has beaten a professional human player at the ancient boardgame, go, albeit with a 9-stone head start. It's a surprising result to those familiar with the game, since computers have so far proved no match for human players.

MoGo's performance stunned onlookers, including another go software programmer who said: "I'm shocked at the result. I really didn't expect the computer to win in a one-hour game."

Although it has similarities to chess in computational terms, go strategy is in practice much more complex. Its large board and few rules mean that a computer attempting to calculate a "tree" of possible future moves quickly creates an exponentially growing tangle. In the relatively short time available in a game, there isn't time to work out the best option.

Current AI techniques just aren't up to scratch. Increasing the speed with which calculations can be made is thought to be unlikely to lead to proper computer supremacy - although it seems to have played a major role in MoGo's victory. Instead many experts say novel ideas about how to give AIs some equivalent to the kind of intuition used by human players are needed. Easier said than done.

Tom Simonite, online technology editorLabels: artificial intelligence, computing, games

Posted by Tom at 5:15 PM