- From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 22:49:52 +0100
- To: Pierre-Antoine Champin <swlists-040405@champin.net>
- Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
On 15 December 2010 09:39, Pierre-Antoine Champin <swlists-040405@champin.net> wrote: > Melvin, > > (sorry to the others, I used the wrong address to post to the mailing lists, > so my previous message didn't get through) > > you wrote: >> You dont need smart servers, just socially aware cloud storage. Flat >> files are fine, you can let Agents do all the middleware. > > ok, I should'nt have used the term 'server'; I was not considering > cloud-storage (yet)... > > It does not really change my point, though: if you only trust a single agent > ("dungeon master") to manage game-data and enforce game logic, you end up > with a rather centralized system. You can trust multiple agents. > > On the other hand, distributing the game logic is harder: Harder but more fun! > - how do different agents maintain consistency of the game? Rules and game logic. Theres a number of ways, one is simply to encapsulate game login in the agent code. > - how do you trust a newly discovered agent? Web of Trust. This should be a sem web scale service. > - how do you know that several agents are not colluding to cheat? You dont know that but distributed systems have a good track record of fault tolerance. > > But obviously, I merely scratched the surface, while you seem to have > clearer ideas on the subject... :) -- thanks for the links by the way. > > I'll keep an eye on that. I've summarized some of the links in this thread under the concept Linked Open Gaming http://linkedgaming.org/ If you have a game world or client I'll add to the list. Note that the ontology now has items. > > pa > > On 12/15/2010 12:39 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >> >> On 14 December 2010 22:21, Pierre-Antoine Champin >> <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> this is fun, but we have to ask ourselves: what is the added value of >>> RDF/sem-web/linked-data here? >>> What does http://drogon.me/ have that wouldn't be possible with HTML+PHP? >> >> To me the Web, particularly the Sem Web is a universal space whose key >> advantage is interoperability. >> >> So, each world can interop with similar worlds. >> >> Also worlds can operate with other parts of the Semantic Web Space. I >> use the acronym SEMANTIC to describe key areas: >> >> Social >> Entertainment >> Markets >> Access >> Nearby services >> Trust >> Information management >> Currencies >> >> So a game can be social, have trading with virtual currencies and >> markets, you can interact with a personal or public web of trust, with >> existing information or things in the real world in your locality (eg >> augmented reality), using web standards. >> >> Granted each area on the list is still in an embryonic phase. But >> this is a level of interop simply not available in other systems. >> >> We've seen linking of basic social and trust in PHP+HTML (facebook) >> and social and entertainment (zynga) get some traction. But when we >> have interop across all areas we'll have a that much more powerful >> system. >> >>> Don't get me wrong, I think those ideas is great, and kudos to you guys >>> for >>> turning them into code so quickly! >>> >>> My two cents on this question: >>> >>> 1/ linking to real world data is definitely an interesting track, because >>> this leverages existing linked data for the purpose of the game >> >> Yes, agree, leverage interop. >> >>> >>> 2/ another way to use linked data principles is that the game can be >>> distributed, even more so than an HTML-based game. >> >> Exactly. >> >>> >>> I imagine that every character, place, item... could have its own RDF >>> description, linking to each other. A triple between two objects (X is >>> located at Y, X owns Z...) is considered true only if both the subject >>> and >>> the object claim it. >>> >>> This implies that the RDF files are hosted by "smart" servers that will >>> allow updates by anybody, but under certain conditions. >> >> You dont need smart servers, just socially aware cloud storage. Flat >> files are fine, you can let Agents do all the middleware. >> >> http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/CloudStorage.html >> >>> >>> For example, a place will acknowledge that it contains a person only if >>> the >>> person claims to be in that place, and only there. >> >> This is game logic. It need not reside on a server. >> >>> >>> The protocol might be tricky to design for more complex things like >>> transactions. I imagine that an item would change its owner only after >>> checking that both the old and the new owner explictly agree on the >>> transaction >>> >>> <#me> game:agreesOn [ >>> a game:Transaction ; >>> game:give some:sword ; >>> game:receive some:money ; >>> ] >> >> Im working on an economic aspect. This is an interesting proposal on >> transactions and contracts: >> >> http://iang.org/papers/ricardian_contract.html >> >> I have reasonable confidence we can introduce a sophisticated economy >> that can be leveraged by all sem web projects, probably before end of >> next year. >> >>> >>> Plus, the buyer would have to trust the sword not cheat on them and >>> return >>> to its previous owner without notice... >>> >>> Fights will probably be even trickier... But I think the idea is worth >>> exploring... >> >> Many ways to model this, again agents can handle this. >> >> Traditional architecture is >> >> client<--> middleware<--> data store >> >> Web oriented architecture is more flexible and can have, in addition: >> >> client<--> data store >> client<--> agent<--> data store >> client<--> data store<--> agent >> >> With trust and PKI regulating actions. Of course we see why WebID is >> important here too. >> >>> >>> pa >>> >>> >>> On 12/02/2010 01:20 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >>>> >>>> On 2 December 2010 01:13, Toby Inkster<tai@g5n.co.uk> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, 1 Dec 2010 23:06:42 +0100 >>>>> Melvin Carvalho<melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I think the next thing I need to model is 'items'. >>>>>> >>>>>> At present need to work out a way to say a location has an item. >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps model it the other direction? >>>>> >>>>> <item22> game:initial_position<node394> . >>>> >>>> I was thinking more along the lines of: >>>> >>>> Location x has >>>> item 1 >>>> item 2 >>>> player 1 >>>> player 2 >>>> >>>> With a trusted Agent(dungeon master) adding them to a copy of the game >>>> world. >>>> >>>> The DM is allowed to sparql update the locations via insert and >>>> delete, contains the game logic, and interacts with players. >>>> >>>> In this way you can have 1 or more DM's given access to administer the >>>> worlds, the best DMs would become 'resident' in the game world. >>>> >>>> Agree, it's not the only way to model it, but I like the idea of a >>>> file based solution mediated by agents. >>>> >>>> Make sense? >>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Toby A Inkster >>>>> <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> >>>>> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > >
Received on Thursday, 16 December 2010 21:51:29 UTC