Choose Your Theme
Warren Shea

Archive for April, 2012

Site Updates: updating JavaScript libraries

Wednesday, April 18th, 2012 at 12:38 am

This isn’t huge news…but I updated that JavaScript libraries on both worldofwarren.com and warrenshea.com.
They’re now using the current, up-to-date
jQuery 1.7.2
jQuery UI 1.8.19
jQuery prettyPhoto v3.1.4

up from
jQuery 1.7.1
jQuery UI 1.8.13
jQuery prettyPhoto v2.5.6

It took some doings to get prettyPhoto to work…I was dumb when I put in 2.5.6 and changed the library code to suit my needs so it took a little longer to add than it should have.

I also removed jQuery Accordion, I didn’t need it anymore after I worked my resume.

I’ve also been updating warrenshea.com. I think the portfolio’s section is good at 30 items. Now to write content for those 30 sections and do my timeline experience.

Battle Royale. The Hunger Games. Titanic. They all have something in common.

Tuesday, April 17th, 2012 at 1:58 am

I just rewatched Battle Royale. And then, purely by coincidence of all the Titanic buzz, Titanic. Again.
I’ve seen both multiple times but not in recent years.

This was originally a Battle Royale VS Hunger Games post, having just rewatched Battle Royale. But after watching Titanic, I found there is something they all have in common. But I will write about that later.

Battle Royale VS The Hunger Games
Battle Royale moves quicker than Hunger Games, especially at the start and the set up.
It’s also a bit more realistic…in some ways, unrealistic in others.

I enjoy the of concept of Battle Royale more: that a group of unsuspecting (this is very important) students suddenly emerge on an island and have to kill each other to survive.
In contrast, The Hunger Games has participants that are trained to win the Hunger Games.
Um…doesn’t it kinda defeat the purpose of these games to have some members train their whole lives for them? As I wrote that, I realize that this is actually similar to most reality shows (ex. American Idol/The Voice). That someone with trained musical background could compete with someone who’s never really training a day in his/her life. But I don’t like it like that. It’s not fair. But I guess the Hunger Games isn’t about fair, it’s about gambling and entertainment. I suppose in this scenario, it’s more fun if things aren’t fair.

Damn, I was all set to say that Battle Royale was better from this perspective, but it’s actually accurate to how each backstory and environment is set up. I will still admit that if I were to watch either first, I’d like to have watched Battle Royale first simply to show how the situation affects those completely unwilling to fight, as well as those who are not physically or mentally fit to fight. The Hunger Games does too good a job training people about the battle before it begins. I don’t like that.

What I really liked about Battle Royale was that…it was very accurate to how I believe a similar situation would occur. There are really scared students, students that die easily, students that trust too easily, students that are arrogant. And also, there are students who are pretty powerful. I’ll always remember watching that crazy guy on a cliff, surrounded by people and carrying only a fan…only to get the jump of like 6 people and kill them. So pro. I mean, realistically he should have died to them but it’s well played that the group, in it’s numbers, is arrogant. Like people would be in such groups. And I really believe that kind of arrogance can be taken advantage of.

There was one thing that immediately was shocking to me in the Hunger Games. When they first start the battle and a bloodbath occurs, near the weapons and supplies. Surely the participants have seen previous years and know it’s a ridiculous bloodbath. In all the chaos, it’s very likely even a skilled person can die at the hands of another skilled individual. You don’t win a battle royale (no pun intended) by attacking everyone. You pick people off one at a time using your wit, intelligence, and patience. You strike when people are weak. Like Katniss. But I mean, shouldn’t EVERYONE be doing that? The only way you’d wanna rush in is if you’re SO FAST that you can get a weapon and kill other people before they have a chance. But I doubt, with all these trained members, that any single one member could be that much faster than the rest.

I also dislike the idea of the environment forcibly attacking the participants in the Hunger Games due to the administrator’s pleasure. Who wants to gamble on a rigged game. Katniss is close to the edge. LETS THROW FIRE AND FIREBALLS AT HER. Oh yes, the other contestants don’t have to deal with that simply cuz they didn’t happen to be near the edge? Um. BULLSHIT. If I was betting on someone and a FAKE FIRE killed them, I’d be pissed.

And what’s with the sponsors sending shit to help them. UM. THAT NOISE WILL GIVE AWAY MY POSITION YOU IDIOTS. “Oh good, hear comes my medic—” *dead*. Cuz the guy with the gun heard the noise and capped me.

AM I TREATING THIS GAME OF SURVIVAL TOO SERIOUSLY?

Okay, I think I’m done with THAT rant.

Now, To Compare Battle Royale. The Hunger Games. Titanic.
It seemed a bit strange that I’d find something similar between Titanic and a Battle Royale situation…but let me get to my point.
All 3 movies primarily feature a love story (at it’s core) where the main couple tries to survive, amid a battle of other people’s survival.
In Battle Royale and the Hunger Games, Shuya and Noriko & Katniss and Peeta try to survive while the people around the main characters are trying to survive. That’s the basic premise.
In Titanic, after the ship begins to sink, Jack and Ross try to survive while the people around the main characters are trying to survive. That’s also the basic premise….
How coincidentally alike these movies are. You’d almost think there’d be no similarities.

OMG I just realized that I also watched Scott Pilgrim VS the World and…
It’s about Scott Pilgrim and Ramona Flowers (a love story) as Scott tries to SURVIVE the battles of Ramona’s Exes. YEAH?! ALSO SIMILAR? Except the other characters aren’t really trying to survive, it’s just Scott….but 1/2 the premises is true.

What’s with all these love stories wrapped up in action that I’m watching?
*Thinks about what I plan to watch the rest of this week*
The Walking Dead – main characters trying to survive, rest of the world also trying to survive the zombie apocalypse
Dawson’s Creek – hmm..not much survival here.

I think I’ve been watching too many things regarding survival. Or maybe it’s just that many movies like that concept…
Most video games are about survival (things trying to kill you). Love stories are about a couple’s survival through hardships.

…okay, I’ve written enough about this…for now.
Kinda tired, I should sleep soon.

Vacation Time

Saturday, April 14th, 2012 at 2:29 pm

I have another vacation this whole week.
9.5 days of vacation…tho I have to work .5 days of them tomorrow :(

I have specific goals that I really want to meet this time around so I’m going to have to work hard.

Watch – Walking Dead S1 and S2 again…during the day lol
Watch – Scott Pilgrim
Watch – Dawson’s Creek (finish this)
Watch – Battle Royale
Watch – Game of Thrones, maybe…
Read – That dog book
Convert camcorder Videos
Blog – about 2 posts on my mind lately
Game – Zelda: Majora’s Mask (if there’s time)
Donate monitor
Dispose of wood
Expenses Spreadsheet

I can’t say what I’m going to work on tho if you’re reading this, you probably know.
I have set timelines that I want to meet.
14-22 = 9 days
14 – Relax/go out
15 – Work
16 – 18.5 Finish project
18.5 – What happens after finish project
19 – Study
20-22 – Game/Relax

That’s the schedule I’m going to try to meet. I have no excuses not to meet them.

Google+…wuhhh?

Thursday, April 12th, 2012 at 12:53 am

Google+ has changed its layout.

Check it out here.
…also, I get a nice Google+ hit cuz if you’re on this page, maybe you’ll wanna hit my Google+ profile ;)

Anyways, back to the layout changing. You’d think that doesn’t matter to me too much…except my main worldofwarren.com theme right now is (old) Google+. And let’s face it, as much as the GMAIL theme was interesting/practical, it’s simply just uglier than the Google+ version. Fluid layout is tricky.

Things I like about this Google+ redesign:

  • Scrollbar (require Google Chrome to see it…boourns)
  • Left Icon images/Navigation that is position:fixed (so it’s always there). Pretty and I like it. Which means if I revamp MY Google+ layout, I might copy that. But I doubt I’ll revamp my layout cuz…

Things I dislike about this Google+ redesign:

  • Cover Photo. Um, a little TOO similar to Facebook now duntcha think? Innovative? No.
  • While I like the Google Chat appearing if you have “extra” room…W.T.F. is with that awkward moment between when the window is perfect size without chat and then you horizontally increase the window…and then the chat pops up. For a moment in between those 2 states, it looks hideous!

    Hmmm…

    Interesting, it looks good on 1024 width (no chat) AND 1280 width (chat). The only default resolution width between those numbers is 1152×864 which deals with 1.5% of people. Effectively, they’ve found that perfect number/size for that chat column. And I can see that Google+ is MEANT to be seen on an exactly 1280xwhatever resolution. Everything fits PERFECTLY at that width. Interesting. HOWEVER.

  • For larger resolutions, like a widescreen monitor for example, what is with ALL THAT EXTRA WHITE SPACE. Could that look more hideous? I mean…it’s funny, it’s like how GMAIL is. The reason I liked the old Google+ theme was that it was like Facebook/Twitter. Fixed width. Centered Content. WINNING SOLUTION. But no, this is Fluid width…regarding white space. Fixed width, Left Aligned regarding content. EW. REGRESSIVE UPDATE?!
  • So there are PROS and CONS to the redesign but I’m fairly disappointed. I don’t quite get what was wrong with the old design.

    With both my GMAIL and Google+ themes being replaced by newer Google themes, I’m starting to think maybe I shouldn’t copy themes anymore >_< ….but i’m not a designer and IT’S JUST SO MUCH EASIER than making a theme by myself. I’m a developer, I just want to develop the theme….not design it. What do I do about my themes? Suggestions…?

Tutorial: This ain’t yo mom’s absolute pathing…sup?!

Monday, April 9th, 2012 at 4:39 pm

I should probably have a better title name considering what this tutorial is supposed to accomplish.

So as most of you hopefully know, putting a leading slash in a path refers to a root directory.

Example:
If the domain is http://www.worldofwarren.com/ and you link to
<a href=”/images/”>images</a>,
it will link to http://www.worldofwarren.com/images/

So what happens if you put 2 leading slashes in a path?
NOTHING LIKE THE ABOVE.

Purpose of this tutorial
To display the practical use of a URL with a leading double slash (//) in a path.
A URL with a double slash inherits the current protocol.

What you need to know/have
Basic HTML

Procedure
If you’re on an HTTP site (http://www.URL.com/) and you have

<img src=”//www.URL.com/images/logo.gif” alt=”” />,

then the image will reference http://www.URL.com/images/logo.gif

If you’re on an HTTPS site (https://www.URL.com/) and you have

<img src=”//www.URL.com/images/logo.gif” alt=”” />,

then the image will reference https://www.URL.com/images/logo.gif

Same code. But based on current protocal (HTTP or HTTPS), different results.

My ramblings
The // takes whatever protocol (HTTP or HTTPS) that the webpage is currently using and applies the referenced item to that. It’s awesome if you’re building secure and non-secure pages.

You wouldn’t need to use this on files that are within the same domain. In this case, relative pathing is probably better. But sometimes you link to files outside your domain.

For example, Google’s jQuery or SWFObject library.

Anyways, hope you learned something. I taught a lot of people this since learning it earlier this year, it’s awesome and so useful!

People are always asking “This form is supposed to be secure, but IE is prompting me with an alert that there are unsecure elements. PLZ FIX” and then you can be like “YO I JUST APPLY THE LEADING DOUBLE SLASH…sup?!”