Computing Ignorance

Proverbs of Computer Vision and Robotics

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Tue, 20 Aug 2013 16:40:00 +0000

I've put up what I think is a fun post at my Computing Intelligence blog:

Proverbs of Computer Vision and Robotics

Since this is the first time I've updated that blog in several years, I thought it might be worth posting a link here, too (not that I have much activity here, but it is at least a little more active!).

Halloween Accessories: How to Make a Buckler

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 03:22:00 +0000

My Halloween costume this year never quite came to fruition, but over the last couple weeks I nevertheless managed to create a number of successful accessories. Here, then, is part one of my guide to making a passable buckler, battleaxe, and sword.

Part I: The Buckler
A buckler is a small shield, generally metal and 15-45cm in diameter, gripped in the fist. I honestly used to think that a buckler was actually a small shield which straps (or buckles, hence the name) to the forearm, but Wikipedia leads me to believe that this is actually an inaccurate view arising from Dungeons and Dragons. A buckler has a number of advantages as a Halloween costume prop over a larger shield: it takes less material to make, and it is also a lot easier to carry around at a party. The easiest way to make a buckler is to go to a thrift store which carries dishes and find a round metal bowl (in Toronto, the two best places to look would likely be Honest Eds or a Value Village).

The suitably shaped bowl I used to make my buckler.

Turing the bowl into a buckler is then simply a matter of attaching a handle to carry it. If one is looking to put more distinction between one's buckler and simply a bowl with a handle, an additional option would be to attach a central spike (bucklers were not only defensive, but could also be used as a punching weapon and were occasionally adorned with spikes or sharpened edges for that purpose). Although the traditional buckler handle was in the direct centre, I found it easier to control by placing a handle slightly off centre with a corresponding forearm strap. In order to get away with only a central handle it would have to be anchored fairly strongly to prevent the buckler from twisting in one's grip; using a strap and a handle is more forgiving.

Buckler handle and forearm strap.

I wasn't particularly careful with the appearance of the handle, as the underside of the buckler would generally be hidden. In order to give it some rigidity, I started with a wooden chopstick. I then took an old sock which I used to protect my hand when tousling with the cat (not to worry, I have several pairless socks which have been donated to this cause, so she will not mourn the loss of this one) and used part of it to wrap a layer of cloth around the chopstick. This provided both extra thickness to make the handle easier to hold and "tabs" which I could tape to the surface of the bowl to hold the handle in place. When using tape to secure anything which will need to support weight, it is best to align several strips in alternating perpendicular patterns. After I attached the handle I used the remains of the sock to place a pad on the inner surface of the bowl to prevent my knuckles from rubbing against the bare metal.

My initial strap was a thick rubber band which was also held on with tape, but it ended up snapping in what we believe to be a cat-related incident. Since I had the hot glue-gun out anyway for the sword, I decided to use it to secure a new strap made from two lengths of string wound together.

That wraps up the simplest of the three accessories. Altogether it cost me $3.50 for the bowl, an old sock, some string, a random chopstick I found in our kitchen drawer, some duct tape, and a couple dollops of hot glue. Here is an image of the buckler being held up to parry a strike:

Buckler parrying an axe.

The axe will be described in the next part.

Master of Vision

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 13:47:00 +0000

As those who follow this blog may have noticed, I again entered a bubble of silence since mid-summer. Rather than another bout of writer's block, however, I was instead under deadline pressure to finish my Master's thesis, and time spent writing other things seemed wrong. I am happy to report that on October 5th I defended my thesis, which was accepted without revision. For anyone who is interested in plowing through it, a finalized copy of my thesis can be downloaded from here. Now that my thesis is finished, it is time for me to get busy on my PhD and all of the small items (like marking) which got pushed to the back-burner leading up to the defense. I am hoping that one of those small items which I will now have more time for is blogging regularly again.

Excellent Climate Change Allegory

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 21:52:00 +0000

These past few weeks have involved long hours sitting at my computer trying to hammer out my thesis and ignore the uncomfortable sensation of sweat sticking me to my chair or trickling down my side. Thankfully, I do not suffer from hyperhidrosis, but it has simply been incredibly hot and humid. In fact, this summer has brought on another record set of heat waves, which one can only hope will finally galvanize political environmental action. Of course, this hope is likely in vain. Media Matters published an excellent article on the coverage of the recent heat wave, which is worth reading:

In December 2008 the Washington Post reported that AT&T and DuPont planned to lay off a combined 14,500 employees. The lead of the story said: "Need more proof that the recession is real? An onslaught of grim unemployment and layoff reports yesterday should dispel any lingering doubts."

Was the recession the only force behind these job cuts? No. Other variables would be needed to explain why the layoffs were hitting these specific companies, at this time, and at this scale. But the recession was the obvious background condition, the broader context that could not go unmentioned in a proper news report on the layoffs, and there was no hand-wringing about drawing the connection. The article didn't caution that "No single bankruptcy or job cut can be definitively blamed on the recession." No one waited for a computer model to precisely sort the causes of these layoffs. No one tracked down a contrarian to point out that layoffs happened long before the recession and that, in fact, such-and-such a company somewhere is hiring.

Which brings me to the massive heat wave that we're now emerging from. Scientific observation and analysis have established that human-induced climate change makes extreme heat events more common. But when heat waves hit, many reporters hesitate to mention climate change without appending disclaimers of the sort that you don't see on other beats.

Go read the rest of the article. As with all allegories, it is obviously not a perfect fit, but it does an excellent job of showcasing the frustrating manner in which environmental issues, particularly climate change, is treated by the media.

Some Friday Humour

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 15:01:00 +0000

Given that it is a Friday and some sort of ridiculous construction is taking place just below my window which makes concentrating on work rather difficult, I thought I would post something lighthearted. Here are three videos of Henri, a cat undergoing an existential crisis. I think the videos get progressively better (both in film quality and content), but it is nevertheless worth watching them in order to see the development of poor Henri's nihilism.

What does Stephen Harper think public scientists are for?

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:55:00 +0000

Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada have never provided a convincing illusion of being good for either science or the environment, but they nevertheless managed to wheedle enough support to squeeze out a majority government^*. Somehow, a slim majority has put it into Harper's head that this now means that his party doesn't just lead the Government of Canada, but rather that they are the Government of Canada (or, rather, that the Government of Canada shall now henceforth be renamed the Harper Government). Taking this
conflation and running with it, Harper has consistently taken the view that government scientists must get approval before speaking with the press. The latest example of this policy is a letter sent to Parks Canada employees informing them that it is their "duty" to support the Harper government. The bizarre logic behind this policy seems to be that Harper views Canadian scientists as employees of the government, and since he views the Government of Canada and the Harper Government as synonymous entities, all Canadian scientists (and all other civil servants, by the same logic) are now expected to toe the Conservative line.

Which leads me to conclude that Harper must not understand what public science is for. After all, supporting party policy is the job of politicians and pundits, not scientists. It is this fundamental misunderstanding, then, which leads to the short-sighted axing of huge swathes of Canadian science. For example, the government claims that halting funding for the Experimental Lakes Area makes sense because it no longer fits with Ottawa's mandate. Such a line of reasoning actually does make sense if one believes that the job of government scientists is to support government policy, since the current government doesn't actually care about fresh water preservation or protection.

Civil science in actuality is meant to service the people of the country, not the policy of the government. Of course, this is an old struggle between scientist and politician, but I had honestly believed that a modern understanding had come to pass acknowledging the necessary degree of autonomy and impartiality relegated to scientific and regulatory bodies (like Parks Canada). It is this fundamental perversion of the relationship between policy and empirical study which, to me, is the most disturbing aspect of Harper's leadership.

^{* For anyone who voted for the Conservatives because they were sick of a minority government leading to constant elections, that's a terrible argument. Sometimes having a non-functional Parliament is better than having one which will toe the line for bad policy.}

Solution to Puzzle 16: Trip to Canada

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Sat, 12 May 2012 16:09:00 +0000

Here is the solution to the "Trip to Canada" puzzle:

The Uncle traveled to one location in each province and territory in Canada in the following order:

1.) Alert, Nunavut
2.) Yellowknife, Northwest Territory
3.) Whitehorse, Yukon
4.) Whistler, British Columbia
5.) Red Deer, Alberta
6.) Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan
7.) Winnipeg, Manitoba
8.) Newmarket, Ontario
9.) Trois-Rivieres, Quebec
10.) Eel River Crossing, New Brunswick
11.) Cow Bay, Nova Scotia
12.) Cornwall, Prince Edward Island
13.) Labrador City, Newfoundland and Labrador

I unfortunately did not realize that there is also a Cornwall, Ontario, until after I published this puzzle, but I hope the rest of the locations were unique enough for the puzzle to still have been solvable (plus, Cornwall, PE is the only one which would make sense given the order of the Uncle's travels).

Start of the Week Quotations

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Mon, 07 May 2012 20:32:00 +0000

"The labour of women in the house, certainly enables men to produce more wealth than they otherwise could; and in this way women are economic factors in society. But so are horses."
"There is no female mind. The brain is not an organ of sex. As well speak of a female liver."
- Charlotte Perkins Gilman, American writer and feminist, 1860-1935

"All of us here know there's no better way of exercising the imagination than the study of law. No poet ever interpreted nature as freely as a lawyer interprets the truth." - Jean Giraudoux, French dramatist, 1882-1944

"Diplomacy is to do and say,
The nastiest thing in the nicest way."
- Isaac Goldberg, American journalist, 1887-1938

"Nothing is so impenetrable as laughter in a language you don't understand." - William Golding, English novelist, 1911-93

Start of the Week Quotations

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 19:34:00 +0000

I cannot believe it has been nearly a year since I added another set of these. Here are this week's quotations:

"With five free parameters, a theorist could fit the profile of an elephant." - attributed to George Gamow, Russian-born American physicist, 1904-68

"That kind of patriotism which consists in hating all other nations." - Elizabeth Gaskell, English novelist, 1810-65, in Sylvia;s Lovers

"I've kept political diaries ever since I went into politics... I'd love to do a political memoir, but a lot of people will have to be dead first." - Maire Geoghegan-Quinn, Irish politician and current European Commissioner for Research, Innovation, and Science, 1950-

"Personally I feel happier now that we have no allies to be polite to and to pamper." - George VI, King of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from 1936, 1895-1952, spoken to Queen Mary on 27 June, 1940

"O Freedom, what liberties are taken in thy name!" - Daniel George (Bunting), English writer, 1890-1967

"If you can actually count your money, then you are not really a rich man." - J. Paul Getty, American industrialist, 1892-1976

Since it has been so long since I have put any of these up, I think it is worth reiterating that my inclusion of a quotation is not necessarily an endorsement of its content, but rather just means that it is something that I found either amusing, thought-provoking, or otherwise interesting as I (slowly) progress through a copy of the Oxford Dictionary of Quotations.

Cayo Largo Part V: Underwater Critters

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Sun, 22 Apr 2012 20:16:00 +0000

In Cayo Largo Part IV I described our trip to Iguana Island, which was the first part of our day excursion. In this post I will describe the second part of that trip: snorkeling and wading in the shallows around virgin islands.

After visiting the Iguana Island, our boat set out for a shallow coral bed for some snorkeling. Despite the shallowness of the water (I would guess it wasn't deeper than twenty feet anywhere nearby, although depths are notoriously difficult to judge in clear water), we were still a fair ways away from the coast of Cayo Largo. It was amazing the difference this made; whereas the water directly off the coast, as described in Part II and Part III, was characterized by fine white sand and fish almost the same colour, here the sea was full of fauna in a myriad of colours.

The coral was predominantly yellow-green to yellow-brown, but there were occasional outcroppings of beautiful reds and purples.

A piece of purple coral (click to enlarge)

I should also mention that I found underwater photography to be quite challenging. Light levels and clarity of the image are much more difficult to control and one is undergoing almost constant motion from the waves and currents. Even more challenging is the fact that goggles prevent the use of the viewfinder for targeting the camera. Although, as with most digital cameras, our underwater camera also has a screen which is used more often for aim anyway, the bright sunlight at the surface would generally make the screen unreadable, and thus a large number of our pictures were taken blindly.

Despite photographic difficulties, though, the material we had to work with helped make up for it. There were (I think) four types of fish who swarmed around the boat to feed off the hull and any scraps which fell in the water (Manuel was making lunch and discarded unwanted bits off the side. I don't know how healthy that is for the wildlife, but he and the captain seemed to think it was perfectly normal). Two of the fish were black with blue highlights, and I am only identifying them as separate based on their distinct fin structures. The other two fish were much lighter in colour. One species had vertical black stripes and the other a horizontal yellow stripe down its side. All four seemed perfectly happy to intermix, and you can see them in the two photos I took. You can also see one of the dark fish species cleaning off the underside of the boat in a video I took, and another video of Sarah swimming amongst the fish schools (sorry for the shakiness of the camera). If anyone can identify the species of the fish, please let me know (either in the comments or send me an email).
UPDATE: Thanks to studentjohn's comment, I now have an idea as to the identities of three of the four fish. The big blue and black fellow in the first image appears to be some sort of triggerfish , while the vertically striped fish are sergeant majors (I actually feel kind of silly about not recognizing that), and the fish with a horizontal yellow stripe are yellowtail snappers.

Swarm of schooling fish (click to enlarge)

Another shot of the fish swarm (click to enlarge)

Although these four fish seemed to be the predominate denizens of the area, there were still many other species of fish to be found. I have also included a couple of my favourite pictures of these fish. As with the others, if anyone can help identify the species, let me know.

A really happy looking fish (click to enlarge)


A small multi-coloured fish (click to enlarge)

After snorkeling we were given lunch which consisted of a delicious Cuban lobster dish with rice, buns, and fruit. The final part of the excursion after lunch was a trip out to a small group of uninhabited virgin islands. These were quite beautiful and scenic, with many conch and small fish in the shallows around them. One of the passengers on our boat reported spotting a small crocodile, but Sarah and I were unable to find it.

A view on the beach of the islands (click to enlarge)

There was quite an expansive region of shallows between some of the islands in which the ocean was never much deeper than the knees. Here we discovered several excellent starfish. Even more excitingly, several rays were also zipping through the water. The rays moved quite fast, and so were rather difficult to photograph. It would seem that whenever I gave the camera to Sarah, the rays would swim tantalizingly close to my legs, only to skitter off to Sarah as soon as she had given the camera back to me. After numerous failed tries, Sarah finally managed to get a couple photos. As with the fish above, if anyone can identify the type of ray, please let me know.

Starfish in the shallows (click to enlarge)

The full sting ray swimming away. Unfortunately the water was a little cloudy, most likely due to us churning up sand as we chased the rays (click to enlarge)

This was the best picture we managed to take of the ray's face (click to enlarge)

After we had our fill of sloshing about in the shallows, we got back on the boat and were taken back to the marina on Cayo Largo. We were reunited with our shoes, and a bus took us back to our resort. The next part deals with the many birds we spotted.

Taking a Sick Day

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 14:18:00 +0000

I had originally planned this week on finally finishing some more of my draft topics that have languished for too long in the works. I was particularly interested in opining on the topic of education, given that my mind is once again occupied by the topic given that the winter semester is drawing to a close and I am finishing up with end of term duties. However, a nasty bout of the flu had other plans for me, and so I find the prospect of lounging on the couch watching mindless television and drinking hot water spiced with honey and cinnamon while feeling sorry for myself to be a much better choice in activity.

Luckily for me, my friend Ian has posted a recent essay he wrote on the subject of teaching style, so I can abdicate my responsibility to him for this week. Ian is currently in Korea as part of a program for international English teaching called TaLK. His essay has several interesting comments regarding the maturation of his teaching strategies over the course of his teaching term, and I think would be well worth checking out for anyone interested in teaching.

Cayo Largo, Part IV: Island Critters

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Sat, 24 Mar 2012 01:37:00 +0000

In the middle of our vacation, Sarah and I went on a day-long boat excursion. In Cayo Largo Part III, I had promised to put up pictures and videos from the snorkeling we did while on the excursion, but I had forgotten that I first needed to put up a post about the first part of our excursion: Iguana Island. As always, click on the images for a larger size.

Our excursion started early in the morning. A bus picked us up at our resort and, after brief stops at a few other hotels to pick up some more people, drove everyone to the marina. We had arranged our excursion with the small catamaran option, meaning eight passengers and two crewmen. The captain was a short and lean man with wrinkled, leathery skin befitting a Cuban sea-captain. He sported mustache that was also quite fitting, and was very particular about the rule that no shoes were to be worn on the boat. I don't think the captain spoke a word of English, and aside from a few brief pantomimed conversations spent most of the trip stoically scanning the horizon oblivious to his small cargo of tourists.

Manuel, the first-mate, was young and jovial, and spent most of his time organizing our entertainment. Language was a bit of an issue - four of the other passengers were French-Canadian who had moderate Spanish (and Manuel appeared to be more comfortable with French than English), so they had no problem. However, the other two passengers were a Russian couple with no Spanish and only moderate English at best. I tried my best to help translate, but considering that I was already only getting about half of what Manuel said since his English explanations tended to be a bewildering blend of French, English, and Spanish, I really have to wonder how much managed to get passed along. In the end communication was not really all that vital since we mostly just had to keep our shoes off and watch the early morning sun track across the water.

After a brief trip, we arrived at our first destination of the day: Iguana Island. It is a small rocky island not far from Cayo Largo. As soon as we disembarked we were greeted by dozens of iguanas. Since it was still somewhat early in the morning most were content to simply bask in the sun, but there were a few who were curious about the ranks of tourists unloading on their island.

An iguana basking on the rocks.

One of the largest (and hungriest) iguanas we saw.

Although the massive numbers of iguanas were exciting enough, we quickly discovered that Iguana Island was also inhabited by another type of creature as well. There were several hutias ambling about on the island, seemingly perfectly at home with their reptilian compatriots. There are actually several species of hutia endemic to Cuba, so I am not sure which type were on the island.

A hutia hanging out in a shady patch.

A hutia and an iguana coexisting.

Finally, here is a short of video of one of the hutias walking about. The audio track was mostly just wind on the camera's microphone, so I cut it out entirely (so if you can't hear anything, don't worry; your speakers are probably still working just fine).

The next installment will finally get to the underwater critters from our snorkeling trip.

Mea Culpa

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Sat, 24 Mar 2012 01:31:00 +0000

The other day I ended up browsing through the unfinished drafts on this site and realized that I had never finished the series of posts about the fauna encountered on our trip to Cuba. As it is now coming up to two years since that trip happened, I realize that finishing off that series is long overdue. So, I apologize for the outrageous delay, but at long last I will be finishing those posts off over the next few weeks.

Puzzle Number 16: Trip to Canada

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 20:01:00 +0000

Raylan is a young boy in Kentucky whose Uncle Olyphant has just returned from a trip to Canada. On the drive home from the airport, Raylan excitedly asked his uncle what he did.

"Well, son," Uncle Olyphant replied, "My first night was spent in a frigidly cold environment with a constant siren warning me to keep watch for polar bears. Needless to say, it was not a very pleasant time. However, my trip quickly got much nicer, as the next day I found a fancy golden dagger, and shortly after that I ran into a beautiful alabaster stallion. I went to a show which ended up being a fascinating musical number performed solely by a fellow's mouth, followed by a few days watching the largest species of European deer roam about the prairies. After that, I found the jaw of the largest deer in the world. The next day, to my surprise, I won a marvellous wooden cylinder which one can stick in the wall and hang a hat on. From there I went on to a recently established collection of stores to see if I could find any souvenirs for my favorite* nephew, but we'll talk about that a little more once we get home. The next thing I did was visit a trio of French rivers. A little farther along, once the river was mostly English again, I had to ford it in a location where it was full of voracious eels. Despite the danger, it was well worth it in order to get to a fascinating bay perfect for cattle. From there I caught a boat in order to go see a wall made entirely of maize, and finally ended the trip by visiting a large community of friendly and well-mannered dogs."

Raylan looked quizzically at his uncle. "That sure sounds like a nonsensical trip, Uncle Olyphant. Where in Canada did you go to do all of these things?"

Uncle Olyphant smiled and said, "Son, I've already told you."

Where did Uncle Olyphant go?

Solutions to the puzzle can be found here.

* Note the authenticity of his American speech with the lack of a 'u'.

Test Subjects Needed

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Fri, 02 Mar 2012 16:51:00 +0000

There is a study on word associations being conducted which is trying to develop a large database of information. Gathering data online is always somewhat dubious, but nevertheless it is an interesting project. Participation is fast and actually fairly fun, so it is well worth checking out and filling in the words that come to mind. The one caveat is that you need to be a fluent English speaker, but if you are reading my blog chances are that is the case.

Conscientious Objection

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 20:06:00 +0000

There is currently a political debate in the United States spurred on by Republican and Catholic histrionics regarding access to contraception. In an increasingly common marriage of convenience, Republicans and Catholics (along with several other misogynistic religious groups, but the Catholic influence here is particularly overt) have joined forces to try and prevent contraception from being provided as part of regular health coverage.

Along with the fight over whether or not access to contraception should be part of regular health care (short answer: it should) this debate has prompted the resurgence of the idea that health care workers, particularly those at religious health care institutions, should be allowed to refuse to provide contraceptive services to patients on the grounds of conscientious objection. This is just ludicrous, and I'm not sure how it keeps coming up.

1.) Refusing to provide contraception is not making a personal decision

The standard line in support of contraception is that the health care worker is personally against the use of contraception, and therefore cannot condone providing it. The thing is, this is not comparable to the conscientious objectors in wartime. The original conscientious objectors are refusing to physically go off to war, risk death, and shoot people themselves. No one is asking the health care worker to pop a pill or throw on a condom.

For the particularly thick-headed who cannot seem to understand this difference, try this: imagine going into a grocery store, waiting in one of those horrible cashier lines, and discovering once you finally get to the front that the cashier is a member of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness^* (more widely known as a Hare Krishnan). The cashier informs you that he cannot in good conscience sell you your meat, eggs, cola, tea, or coffee, as the consumption of those are against his religious beliefs, but he will be happy to ring your apples and lettuce through for you. If you want to buy the rest of your groceries, you'll have to wait in a different line. If he happens to be the only cashier on hand at the moment, you'll just have to put your groceries back and go to a different grocery store, or come back later when another cashier is on hand. Now imagine try and take that indignant response to call the manager and explain that the cashier can refrain from eating whatever the hell he wants, but he has no right to tell you what food you can buy, and imagine how much greater than indignation must be for something far more personal than what you are going to be eating for dinner that night.

2.) Not all contraception is about birth control or even sex

This is really simple: just because oral contraception can be used to drastically reduce the chances of pregnancy from unprotected sex does not mean that is the only reason for taking it. In fact, a report released this past November (link to the pdf) by Rachel K. Jones of the Guttmacher Institute claims that over 1.5 million women use birth control pills exclusively for non-contraceptive purposes. Even though it is not up to the health care worker to judge whether women should be having sex for non-reproductive purposes in the first place, refusing to provide contraceptive pills can put the health of women at risk for reasons entirely unrelated to sex.

3.) Health care has standards of practice

Health care workers are not like employees in all fields. Health care (and here I am referring to real health care, not alternative medicine nonsense) has standards of practice that are not optional for very good reasons based on an understanding of human health and physiology. The decisions for what constitutes standards of care can only reasonably be expected to be developed by health experts themselves, and legislating exceptions or specific procedures by an assembly largely made up by individuals ignorant of medical knowledge is nonsensical and potentially even dangerous.

^* Obviously this could work with a variety of religions and products.

Brief Personal Update

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 14:35:00 +0000

It has been far too long since I was actively writing. Thesis work has really ramped up over the past few months, and that has crowded out most other activities. Now that it comes time to actually write the thesis, however, I find I am out of writing practice and could use the exercise of drafting something regularly. I have also used the blogging break to begin accumulating anew a mental list of trivialities on which I would like to opine, and I have even found myself mentally composing prose while on the bus or at the gym. This had, for whatever reason, largely stopped during my many months of writer's block, so I am hoping that the reappearance of my inner monologue bodes well for the future.

2011 was a rather big year for me. I got married to a wonderful woman at the end of the summer, and toward the end of the year we bought and moved into a new condominium. We are greatly enjoying the new space (especially our cat, Klein, who now has dozens of excellent locations to lounge in the sun). The year was not without its challenges (such as administrative mix-ups over funding and some health issues), but it was nevertheless a fairly monumental one. Perhaps some stories from it will find their way up here in addition to my other planned expositions.

Solution to Puzzle 15: The Oblique Title Wars

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 20:48:00 +0000

After a long delay, here are the solutions to the latest puzzle.

Solutions were sent in by Scott, Ian^*, and Robert. It should also be noted that Robert's solutions come in two varieties: those which Robert answered on his own first pass through, and then those solutions provided collectively by Robert and other members of the UNCG Atheists, Agnostics, and Skeptics.

1.) The Office of Modification
The Adjustment Bureau (Movie)
Solved by Scott and Robert.

2.) 510nm Illumination Device
Green Lantern (Comic book turned into a movie)
Solved by Scott and Robert + UNCG

3.) Crimson Literary Symbol
The Scarlet Letter (Book)
Solved by Ian and Robert + UNCG

4.) Consumes, Stalks & Exits
Eats, Shoots, & Leaves (Book)
Solved by Ian and Robert

5.) Verified Falsehoods
True Lies (Movie)
Solved by Scott, Ian, and Robert

6.) The Small Royal Son
The Little Prince (Book)
Solved by Scott, Ian, and Robert

7.) Occupant Wickedness
Resident Evil (Movie)
Robert + UNCG actually answered 'Bad Company' for this one

8.) CRUSH
MASH or, as Scott pointed out, more correctly M*A*S*H (Television, although Scott also helpfully pointed out that the book and movie did not have the asterisks)
Solved by Scott and Robert + UNCG

9.) Searching for Kind Thoughts
Good Will Hunting (Movie)
This one was tricky, since goodwill is the synonym I used but is technically one word (and thus not the title of this film). Nevertheless, Robert+UNCG managed to get this one.

10.) Large Noise Conjecture
Big Bang Theory (Television)
Solved by Scott, Ian, and Robert + UNCG

11.) Contest of Feudal Seats of Power
Game of Thrones (Television)
Solved by Scott and Robert + UNCG

12.) The Windstorm
The Tempest (Shakespearean Play)
I was hoping people would realize there hadn't been any Shakespeare yet and guess this, but it was clearly too ambiguous a clue. Scott answered 'The Hurricane' (Movie) and Robert + UNCG answered 'Twister' (Movie).

^* Ian used to be known around here as Cornucrapia, but he has recently embarked on an adventure teaching English in Korea, and has started a new blog to chronicle his experiences. It is well worth checking out.

Interim Puzzle

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 02:42:00 +0000

I had a number of people tell me they would get back to me with more answers from this past puzzle, so I have decided to provide a brief extension before I post the answers. In the meantime, here is a very cool pictorial puzzle that one of Sarah's friends shared with her called Not to Scale. It is surprisingly fun and challenging.

Puzzle Number 15: The Oblique Title Wars

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Tue, 26 Jul 2011 15:37:00 +0000

I realize it has been a long time since I posted my last puzzle. Since the Oblique Title puzzles have always seemed to be a favourite, I figured another installment made the most sense. As a reminder to those who haven't played before, the following is a set of movie, television show, book, or play titles which have been obscured through the use of synonyms. I make every effort to ensure that the titles I have selected are at least reasonably famous.

Feel free to look at earlier Oblique Title puzzles to get a better idea (for example, the first Oblique Title puzzle, or even the whole collection).

As usual, please refrain from leaving the answers in the comments, and instead send your answers to: mozglubov@gmail.com

1.) The Office of Modification

2.) 510nm Illumination Device

3.) Crimson Literary Symbol

4.) Consumes, Stalks & Exits

5.) Verified Falsehoods

6.) The Small Royal Son

7.) Occupant Wickedness

8.) CRUSH

9.) Searching for Kind Thoughts

10.) Large Noise Conjecture

11.) Contest of Feudal Seats of Power

12.) The Windstorm

No Diplomacy?

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Tue, 26 Jul 2011 15:19:00 +0000

For those that actually found my analysis of the first couple turns of a Diplomacy game interesting, you must be wondering what happened to the rest. Well, there were a couple factors which disrupted my analysis of the remainder of the game:

1.) The game moved very quickly. With each phase on a 12 hour cycle, I quickly ended up behind on my analysis. Since I had therefore seen ahead several turns ahead from when I was analyzing, I felt my predictions were no longer particularly fair.

2.) A number of players ended up dropping out of the game, massively skewing its outcome. The first player to drop was Turkey in Fall 1903, but another player took over in Spring 1904 and gallantly played out an admittedly weak position. More unfortunately, in Fall 1905 Germany made a couple very clever retreats behind Russian lines, and the Russian player (despite his commanding lead and still quite viable position) simply stopped submitting orders in Spring 1906, ultimately auto-surrendering in Spring 1907. This completely upset the balance of the game, since it left a massive power vacuum in the east.

Despite this, the winner (Italy) played a very good game (and Germany, the second Turkey, and Austria-Hungary all lost with good grace), and the public press is fairly amusing as well. Therefore, if you are curious to see how the game progressed, I believe it is publicly viewable. One can click on the order history button in the top right and scroll through the turns to see how the game progressed.

An Exercise in Diplomacy: Spring 1902

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 15:14:00 +0000

The first two turns left Russia with a lot of forward momentum into the Balkans and Austria-Hungary, but with Turkey aimed at her underbelly. Despite Turkey’s strategic position, he did not utilize his secured build from the conquest of Bulgaria, making me think that Turkey’s player has possibly even dropped the game. Austria-Hungary and Italy were both held at three builds, although Austria-Hungary was in a distinctly worse position with his capital of Vienna under control by a Russian army. Germany, France, and England all managed to secure two builds, and what remains to be seen is who in the west will be the odd man out.

Spring 1902 Orders

Spring 1902
Britain
Norway MOVE Skagerrack -> resolved
Edinburgh MOVE North Sea -> Bounced
London HOLD -> resolved
Belgium SUPPORT Burgundy to Ruhr -> Dislodged by A Ruh - Bel
North Sea MOVE North Sea -> Illegal order replaced with Hold order

Dislodged Army in Belgium destroyed.

Britain faces a French back-stab, which she probably should have seen coming given the French fleet built in Brest. France clearly convinced Britain he would be making an attack on Ruhr, leaving Britain supporting a non-existent attack. In addition to the French stab, Britain somehow managed to foul up two of her own orders, disrupting her fleet movements. Despite her almost overwhelming force of fleets, leaving three of them just sitting in place puts Britain in a bad place. Now that France has thrown his lot in with Germany, Britain will most likely swing her fleet from Edinburgh around to Clyde to either cover Liverpool if France sends a fleet into the Irish Sea or North Atlantic, or to help mount a future attack on France.

France
Brest MOVE English Channel -> resolved
Paris MOVE Picardy -> resolved
Portugal MOVE Mid-Atlantic Ocean -> resolved
Spain MOVE Gascony -> resolved
Burgundy SUPPORT Ruhr to Belgium -> resolved

France was left in an excellent position at the end of the last year, with an Italy clearly occupied in the east and a war brewing between Germany and Britain, he virtually had the pick of his allies. Now that he is in possession of the English Channel, France faces a conundrum. Unless Germany can quickly take control of the North Sea (which is unlikely given that their hand has been tipped and Russia has two fleets bearing down on the Baltic Sea), France cannot hold the Channel without tying up both his fleets. However, any delay just gives Britain more time to get into defensive position and possibly even rally support in the south. I would recommend France either makes sure his fleets stay in position by supporting from the Mid Atlantic this turn and convoys an army into Wales (or London, if he thinks Britain will gamble and try to stop a move to Wales with her fleet), or France should gamble that Britain won’t force his fleet out of the Channel and send his fleet from the Mid Atlantic to the North Atlantic. Once in the Mid Atlantic, France can threaten Liverpool or move to the Norwegian Sea, where he can threaten both Edinburgh and Norway, forcing Britain’s fleets into a chasing game. Either outcome (a French army on British soil or a French fleet in the northern waters) will work wonders in disrupting Britain’s defense and counterattack. Without accomplishing either, however, Britain’s superior naval power (with Russian help) will be able to push France and Germany back and punish them. Even without Russian help, Britain can force France and Germany into a long and slow grind.

Germany
Munich MOVE Silesia -> resolved
Kiel SUPPORT Holland to hold -> resolved
Holland SUPPORT Ruhr to Belgium -> resolved
Ruhr MOVE Belgium -> resolved
Denmark HOLD -> resolved

Germany has managed to drive Britain into the sea and seize Belgium for the Kaiser, but his prospects remain far from certain. Britain’s bungled moves have saved Germany the fearful prospect of a British fleet in the Heligoland Bight, North Sea, and Skaagerak, but he still lacks possession of the North Sea. I find his lack of fleet use surprising, although his support of Holland from Kiel suggests that he did not yet fully trust his French ally. Even so, the order of Denmark to the North Sea would, more than likely, have served him well. If Britain had successfully exited the North Sea, such a move would prevent Edinburgh from moving in to take its place and leave Denmark still safely in place.

More confusing is Germany’s developing relationship with Russia, but that will be discussed in more detail when Russia’s moves are dealt with. Munich remains dangerously exposed, with a Russian, Italian, and French army all sitting around its perimeter.

Italy
Ionian Sea MOVE Greece -> resolved
Venice MOVE Trieste -> resolved
Tyrolia SUPPORT Trieste to Vienna -> resolved

Italy finally moved into his first neutral supply centre, but was forced to do it with his fleet. That means his fleet will have to stay in place next turn to gain control, and it will be at least another year before Italy takes possession of Tunisia. If he is not careful, France may manage to sneak a fleet around the Iberian horn (or build one in Marseilles) and steal Tunisia out from under him. Even more in Italy’s favour, however, is that he now has an army in Trieste. Combined with his an army in Tyrolia, Italy has the potential to break out of the peninsular shell that show many Italians find themselves stuck in. However, by working with the Austro-Hungarians, Italy has likely alienated his erstwhile Russian ally, and must continue to build his forces. Altogether, however, I think Italy had a good year.

Austria-Hungary
Serbia MOVE Budapest -> Bounced
Albania SUPPORT Ionian Sea to Greece -> resolved
Trieste MOVE Vienna -> resolved

Austria-Hungary had an interesting turn. In many ways, he appeared to pick Italy as the lesser evil, sacrificing Trieste to the Italians in order to get Vienna back. If Greece and Trieste are truly enough to satisfy Italy, then Austria-Hungary may have actually bought himself some time, and even the prospect of a resurgence. As long as Trieste remains in the hands of the Italians, however, Austria-Hungary’s fleet will remain lonely and cut off from the prospect of naval support. With a possible alliance with Italy, however, the fleet becomes almost a hindrance, and Austria-Hungary may even try to coordinate its demise with Italy’s help. If not, Austria-Hungary may actually try a stab of his own, and oust Italy from Greece next turn given Turkey’s distraction with Russia. Regardless, Austria-Hungary remains in a troubled position, and the actions of a desperate player are hard to telegraph. I think the player deserves some credit for continuing to play the game. Too many players simply drop a game in the face of initial setbacks.

Turkey
Black Sea SUPPORT Armenia to Sevastopol -> Supported unit has failed
Armenia MOVE Sevastopol -> Bounced
Bulgaria MOVE Rumania -> Bounced

Turkey had two attack patterns to choose from: although Bulgaria and Armenia are directed to attack Rumania and Sevastopol, respectively, Turkey must choose whether his fleet supports the attack on Rumania or Sevastopol. Russia has a counter to each move (if Turkey focuses on Rumania, Russia can cut support from the Black Sea with her fleet. If Turkey focuses on Sevastopol, Russia can do what she did: sit in Sevastopol and support from Moscow), but if she guesses incorrectly Turkey will take his target. It should be noted that Turkey did have one option that would have guaranteed him Rumania (at least without Austro-Hungarian intervention): attack Rumania with his fleet and support from Bulgaria. The main reason not to do this, however, would be that if Russia did attack the Black Sea from Sevastopol in the same turn, she would gain control of the Black Sea while Turkey would have a largely useless fleet sitting in Rumania. Turkey’s lack of a build last turn now becomes incredibly important; Russia was much more likely to be able to guess which of the two attacks Turkey would make because, without an army having been built in Constantinople, advancing out of Bulgaria leaves him incredibly exposed. Russia thus made the correct guess, and now Turkey has wasted his momentum. Without Austro-Hungarian help, Turkey cannot break Russia’s current position. Even more worrisome, an Austro-Hungarian and Italian alliance could potentially walk into Bulgaria (and could even do so unstoppably if Russia happens to cut Turkish support in the Black Sea or provides support from Rumania). Despite the presence of a Russian army in Galicia now (which could allow Russia to completely shut down Turkey’s attack without having to guess), the Galician army is likely to be busy dealing with Austria-Hungary and Turkey probably still has a shot next turn. His best tactic, I believe, would be to attack Rumania from the Black Sea and support from Bulgaria (while attacking Sevastopol from Armenia). Even if Russia takes the Black Sea, Turkey will now have two builds and will be able to completely encircle the Russian southern fleet, destroying it in the Spring. Russia will be unlikely to get the necessary builds to put a second fleet in Sevastopol (even though it will likely be vacant from a bounce between Armenia and Moscow) because she will have lost Rumania (and possibly Vienna).

Russia
Moscow SUPPORT Rumania to Sevastopol -> Supported unit has failed
Warsaw MOVE Galicia -> resolved
Sevastopol MOVE Black Sea -> Bounced
Rumania MOVE Sevastopol -> Bounced
Sweden HOLD -> resolved
Vienna MOVE Budapest -> Dislodged by A Tri - Vie
St. Petersburg (South Coast) MOVE Gulf of Bothnia -> resolved

Dislodged Army in Vienna retreats to Bohemia

The Great Russian Bear appears to have run into some slight trouble (most likely owing to the entirely reasonable fear of her swift growth in the first turn) but she still remains in a strong position. Although her army was forced out of Vienna, it was able to retreat to Bohemia. Since Budapest remains vacant, unless Italy and Austria-Hungary are fully allied now such that Italy supports Austria-Hungary in Vienna, she can force her way back in next turn. She successfully guessed the correct defense against Turkey, so she has managed to maintain her position in Rumania and Sevastopol.

Russia’s relationship with Germany has gotten quite complicated. The German army in Silesia threatens Warsaw, while the Russian army in Bohemia potentially threatens Munich. Likewise, Russia has the potential to force herself into the Baltic Sea, particularly since Germany’s fleets are sure to be tied up defending a British onslaught. Despite all of this, however, Russia’s fleet in Sweden held last turn (as did Germany’s fleet in Denmark) rather than try any sort of hostile movement against each other, which at least suggests the possibility of an understanding. Russia may be playing Britain and Germany against each other, promising aid (or at least mutual non-aggression in the case of Germany) to both of them. Given Britain’s poor bargaining position, I would not be surprised if Russia left Germany alone and waltzed into Norway. It is a gutsy move diplomatically to build a fleet on the anti-German coast of St. Petersburg to actually go after the British, but sometimes those are the most effective forms of subterfuge (as long as they don’t incite your pretend enemy to launch a preemptive attack). It is a tough call to make in the long run; the elimination of Britain greatly strengthens France and Germany, but of the three western powers Britain generally causes Russia the most headaches (at least in the early game), and Russia can always try appealing to French greed to carve Germany up once Britain is gone (depending on how enticing a target Italy appears to be). Unless the ground-work of a Franco-Russian alliance has already been started, though, Russia should not rely too heavily on the prospect of French help in the future. A Franco-German alliance without a British enemy beind them can remain incredibly strong, and Russia is already a powerful enough single entity that any other power should think twice before aiding her.

Start of the Week Quotations

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 02:19:00 +0000

It's a late quotation update today; I woke up sick and then had my desktop die in the morning, so the week got off to a rocky start.

"Most of the change we think we see in life is due to truths being in and out of favour." - Robert Frost, American poet, 1874-1963

"Bach almost persuades me to be a Christian." - Roger Fry, English art critic, 1866-1934

"The Soviet Union has indeed been our greatest menace, not so much because of what it has done, but because of the excuses it has provided us for our failures." - J. William Fulbright, American politician, 1905-95

"The salary of the chief executive of the large corporation is not a market reward for achievement. It is frequently in the nature of a warm personal gesture by the individual to himself."
"Trickle-down theory - the less than elegant metaphor that if one feeds the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows."
- J. K. Galbraith, Canadian-American economist, 1908-2006

An Exercise in Diplomacy: 1901

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Sat, 11 Jun 2011 19:30:00 +0000

In the vein of my recent return to Diplomacy, I decided to use the playdiplomacy.com option to follow a game of Diplomacy. I found a game which appears to have all players active (one of the unfortunate aspects of the public games appears to be a tendency for some players to join up but then forget about the game, leaving their units sitting without orders. This dramatically changes the dynamics of the game), and I have decided to try following the game. Each turn I will give commentary on the positions, and try to predict what will happen in the future. It is important to note that, while I can view the order history and state of the game, I cannot view the actual messages being transmitted by the players. I additionally do not know any of the players, which means that my predictions will be based solely on board position. Thus, I expect I will be wrong much of the time, but I find it an interesting exercise nonetheless. Hopefully you will, too, and even decide to debate my tactical analysis.

Although I will generally give commentary on only one turn at a time, I’ve decided to wait and combine the first year into a single post.

Spring 1901 Orders (click to enlarge)

Spring 1901
Britain
Edinburgh MOVE Norwegian Sea -> resolved
Liverpool MOVE Yorkshire -> resolved
London MOVE North Sea -> resolved

This is a fairly standard British opening. It is a good compromise between being nervous about the Russians (both fleets are available to ensure Norway is an British conquest in the first year) and the French (the army in Yorkshire is available to guard London if France betrays Britain and takes the Channel). The only major drawback is that the army in Yorkshire can only be convoyed by the North Sea, and thus if Britain decides to take a Scandinavian route of advancement she must abdicate any claim on Belgium. Given Russia’s focus on the south, however, I predict that Britain will take Norway with his Norwegian Sea fleet, leaving the North Sea fleet and Yorkshire army available to possibly take Belgium (depending on what France and Germany have to say about that).

France
Marseilles MOVE Spain -> resolved
Paris MOVE Burgundy -> resolved
Brest MOVE Mid-Atlantic Ocean -> resolved

This is also a fairly common French opening, as it is an excellent compromise between defense (capturing Burgundy or at least preventing a German army from holding it early), and the conquest of Iberia. A French army in Burgundy has the potential to upset Germany, but it can also be used to keep France in the decision for Belgium. Given that every player has a unit facing Belgium, it is very hard to guess what will happen there.

Germany
Munich MOVE Ruhr -> resolved
Berlin MOVE Kiel -> resolved
Kiel MOVE Denmark -> resolved

Germany also opened with what is probably the most popular German opening. His fleet in Denmark gives him leverage with Russia over the fate of Sweden, while he can either support himself into Holland to guarantee its acquisition (if he thinks Britain might risk standing him out of it), make a go for both Holland and Belgium, or turn one army around to protect Munich if he thinks France might make a stab for it.

Italy
Venice MOVE Tyrolia -> Bounced
Rome MOVE Venice -> Bounced
Naples MOVE Ionian Sea -> resolved

Italy opened aggressively against Austria-Hungary, but was preempted in his attack by an Austro-Hungarian attack on Tyrolia launched from Vienna. Thus, the entire Italian army train has been halted in its tracks. Italy’s fleet is still poised to either argue over Greece or, more likely, snag Tunisia.

Austria-Hungary
Vienna MOVE Tyrolia -> Bounced
Trieste MOVE Albania -> resolved
Budapest MOVE Serbia -> resolved

Austria-Hungary successfully guessed and prevented Italy’s opening attack, but at the cost of preventing a Russian move to Galicia. While Austria-Hungary’s fleet is now in position to be supported into Greece by his army in Serbia, such a move would leave the Viennese army trying to simultaneously defend all three Austro-Hungarian home supply centres (assuming an actual attack by both Russia and Italy). It is very difficult to predict Austria-Hungary’s fate without some knowledge of the messages being passed around, but at this point it looks like he might be facing a dreaded Italo-Russian alliance seeking to carve up his country. He must entreat Turkey and possibly Germany for aid or risk facing an early exit. It might even be worthwhile to risk moving Serbia back to Budapest while covering Trieste from Vienna and make an unsupported attack on Greece with his fleet. Turkey is unlikely to go for Greece given his move to Armenia leaves no other units to cover Bulgaria, and Italy is more likely to go for the sure build of Tunisia rather than risk not getting a supply centre. The main risk with such an approach is missing out on Serbia if Russia doesn’t attack Budapest, but that may be preferable to the early loss of a home centre.

Turkey
Constantinople MOVE Bulgaria -> resolved
Ankara MOVE Black Sea -> Bounced
Smyrna MOVE Armenia -> resolved

Turkey has opened up with the ‘Russian Attack’ by moving an army to Armenia, an opening which is about as unsubtle as they come. It is unsurprising that Russia has bounced his attack on the Black Sea, but that does limit his ability to do much from Armenia. Turkey should be breathing a sigh of relief, however, since Italy’s spoiled move train this turn prevents an early Lepanto opening, while Austria-Hungary looks to be heavily beleaguered. Turkey will most likely be able to dictate alliance terms to Austria-Hungary, gaining a desperate and grateful ally, or take advantage of the chaos caused by Italy and Russia to gobble up as much of the Balkans as possible, providing much faster Turkish gains than are usually possible.

Russia
Moscow MOVE Ukraine -> resolved
St. Petersburg (South Coast) MOVE Gulf of Bothnia -> resolved
Warsaw MOVE Galicia -> resolved
Sevastopol MOVE Black Sea -> Bounced

Russia is off to a fairly aggressive start in the south, though her aggression appears to have paid off with the occupation of Galicia. Russia will be hoping that the diplomatic pull of Austria-Hungary is not enough to convince Germany to stand her out of Sweden, and that her single unit northern opening is not enough to convince Britain to pursue gains in an Anglo-Russian war. In the south, it appears that Russia has an early enemy in Turkey, and her acquisition of Galicia is unlikely to make her any Austro-Hungarian friends. Still, with Italy looking to attack Austria-Hungary from the west, Russia’s best bet is likely to make as many acquisitions as quickly as she can and move to crush Austria-Hungary before he can rally a defense, and batter down Turkey before he can get too strong. The secret to cracking Turkey, though, will likely to come down to the Italian navy.

Fall 1901 Orders (Click to Enlarge)

Fall 1901
Britain
Norwegian Sea MOVE Norway -> resolved
Yorkshire MOVE Belgium -> resolved
North Sea CONVOY Yorkshire to Belgium -> resolved

Britain is sitting in a fairly comfortable position, with an expeditionary force supported onto the continent by French forces and Norway safely under British control. Whether this is developing into a full Anglo-French alliance remains to be seen, but Germany is likely to be at least a little nervous.

France
Spain HOLD -> resolved
Burgundy SUPPORT Yorkshire to Belgium -> resolved
Mid-Atlantic Ocean MOVE Portugal -> resolved

Whether to take Portugal with the fleet or the army is always a dilemma for France. I usually prefer to put the fleet on the south coast of Spain, as that gives the maximum number of future options for the fleet, but it does tend to make Italy nervous and put the army in Portugal well away from the action. Given the hintings of an Anglo-French alliance (particularly since France helped an English army into Belgium rather than just the fleet) but the lack of a French fleet pointed toward the Mediterranean, Germany should be nervous of his French neighbour. Still, if the plan was a quick exit for the Germans, France could easily have made a stab at the empty Munich.

Germany
Ruhr SUPPORT Kiel to Holland -> resolved
Kiel MOVE Holland -> resolved
Denmark HOLD -> resolved

Germany chose not to bounce the Russian fleet from Sweden, which suggests at least a decently amicable relationship between the German Empire and the Bear. At the same time, his choice to force Holland rather than try for both Holland and Belgium suggests a poor relationship with Britain. What is interesting, though, is that Germany’s moves suggest a wariness of Britain far beyond that which he feels for France, as he neither protected Munich from a possible French stab nor worried about the fate of Belgium (had the British gone after Holland, Belgium would have gone entirely uncontested to the French). Although France appears to be supporting Britain, Germany’s apparent trust could suggest that France is maintaining amicable relations with both, and could even be arranging a Franco-German alliance to attack a Britain over-extended in a war on Germany. Even though Britain’s army in Belgium gives Britain a toehold on the continent, without French support that army could fairly easily be destroyed.

Italy
Venice MOVE Tyrolia -> resolved
Rome MOVE Venice -> resolved
Ionian Sea MOVE Greece -> Bounced

Italy’s actions were interesting. The lack of attack on Trieste was a good guess, and not only provides Russia with Vienna but also puts Italy in a good position to control Trieste by the end of this coming year. However, the attack on Greece was surprising. This was bad for both Italy and Austria-Hungary; both countries are now stuck with only their starting units. Italy will have to work very hard to make sure he does not get left behind by his Russian and Turkish allies when it comes to the spoils of the ailing Dual Monarchy.

Austria-Hungary
Vienna MOVE Trieste -> resolved
Albania MOVE Greece -> Bounced
Serbia SUPPORT Albania to Greece -> Supported unit has failed

Things are not looking good for the Dual Monarchy, with a Russian army controlling his capital and the Turks conspiring with the Italians to keep him out of Greece. Unless the war between Turkey and Russia quickly escalates, Austria-Hungary is looking at an early exit. He had a bad opening (through little fault of his own), and his defensive gambit was unfortunately the wrong choice of moves. Of course, my proposed moves also would have been disastrous, and even the ‘correct’ defense of leaving the Viennese army in place would not have changed the inevitable too greatly; Austria-Hungary is sitting in the worst possible position with an enemy on every side (the only thing that would be worse would be Germany piling on too).

Turkey
Bulgaria SUPPORT Ionian Sea to Greece -> Supported unit has failed
Ankara MOVE Black Sea -> resolved
Armenia MOVE Sevastopol -> Bounced

Turkey’s moves are inscrutable to me. With his armies heading east around the Black Sea as well as into the Balkans, he is not poised to make gains in the Balkans nearly as quickly as the Russian forces. Therefore, his decision to support Italy into Greece is very surprising to me. The only reason I could think of for such a choice would be to try and curry Italian favour against Russia once Austria-Hungary falls, though I will be surprised if this pays off. Turkey is a much more natural target than Russia for a naval power like Italy, particularly if the Italian player is in control of Greece as well as the Ionian Sea. With the opportunity to either support Austria-Hungary (and thereby delay his demise) or move to prevent Russia’s conquest of Rumania, it seems like there were much better options for Turkey’s Bulgarian army. Still, we will see how things go in the future. Turkey now controls the Black Sea and Russia lacks the capacity to build another southern fleet, so he at least has secured a vital tactical position against Russia.

Russia
Ukraine MOVE Rumania -> resolved
Gulf of Bothnia MOVE Sweden -> resolved
Galicia MOVE Vienna -> resolved
Sevastopol SUPPORT Ukraine to Rumania -> Support cut by a arm - sev

Things went pretty well for Russia in the opening year. Poised to get three builds, Russia is emerging as a powerful eastern force. Probably the only unfortunate turn of events is Turkey’s occupancy of the Black Sea. I am fairly surprised that Russia did not use her fleet to block the Black Sea again. Even though that would risk Turkey not making a move for the Black Sea and then walking into Sevastopol, the army in Sevastopol would be entirely cut off and could be forced out with the subsequent Russian builds. Of course, such a tactic would be a gamble, since none of Russia’s secured builds were guaranteed, so Russia’s choice was perhaps safer even if it gives Turkey a decent position despite his smaller force.

Position in Spring 1902, following 1901 Builds

Builds 1901
Britain
BUILD fleet London -> resolved
BUILD fleet Edinburgh -> resolved

Britain has managed to leverage his builds into a truly impressive navy. Any future builds should most likely be armies, but a four fleet force puts Britain in a decently secure position. The lack of a fleet in Liverpool is at least a nod in the direction of Anglo-French relations, though Britain could still make a go at the English Channel.

France
BUILD army Paris -> resolved
BUILD fleet Brest -> resolved

Despite his overwhelming naval superiority, Britain should be at least a little wary of France’s builds. The fleet in Brest has few targets other than the English Channel that could not been more effectively targeted by armies, particularly since the Portuguese fleet has few other movement options other than back into the Mid-Atlantic Ocean (he could move his fleet to one of Spain’s coasts, but then it would have made more sense to simply put his fleet there in the first place).

Germany
BUILD army Munich -> resolved
BUILD fleet Kiel -> resolved

Germany’s build choices are probably the least surprising; he has tensions with the British which makes a fleet in Kiel a natural choice, and an army in Munich puts to rest the worry of a French stab from Burgundy.

Russia
BUILD army Warsaw -> resolved
BUILD army Moscow -> resolved
BUILD fleet St. Petersburg (South Coast) -> resolved

The only choice Russia had with his builds was what to put in St. Petersburg. The choice of a fleet in the south coast is quite surprising, and should be making Germany very nervous. With Austria-Hungary facing an early elimination and Russia in possession of a powerful army that needs to go somewhere, the potential of a pair of Russian fleets operating around the Baltic Sea can only be bad news for the German Empire.

Turkey
No builds?

This was perhaps the most surprising development, with Turkey forgetting to build a new unit. If this means that the Turkish player has dropped out of the game, this is bad news for everyone except Russia. Italy and Austria-Hungary may both feel some relief, but the benefit to Russia stands to quickly outweigh their short-term benefits of a Turkish drop-out.

Anatomy of a Diplomacy Player

noreply@blogger.com (Mozglubov) — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 16:41:00 +0000

I wrote a while ago about the game of Diplomacy (part I, part II, and part III). I have recently been thinking more about the game since I was invited to play my first game ‘by post’ (in the modern sense by playing online). Much has been written about various strategies for the game, so I thought it would be well worth instead concentrating on the characteristics of the players themselves. An important thing to realize about Diplomacy is that not everyone will enjoy it, but for those that do, there isn’t really another game like it. Thus, what follows is an attempt to compile a list of aspects of Diplomacy which should be considered if one is thinking about trying the game.

Play is Methodical
A game of Diplomacy develops slowly; every turn takes about twenty to thirty minutes (when playing face-to-face) or several days to weeks (when playing by post). Most of the pleasure of the game results from methodical contemplation and careful planning. Likewise, there is no chance in Diplomacy aside from the choices of the other players, which makes tactical planning a fascinating mental exercise of projecting moves and counter-moves. If a player enjoys games like chess, then Diplomacy could be worth trying.

There is another aspect to the methodical nature of Diplomacy that is not reflected in Chess: the amount of writing involved. When playing face-to-face or in some methods of post play, all orders must be written (in a particular format, no less), and when playing by post most correspondence will be mostly written (I have heard of some players coordination moves by phone or by meeting up, but that is less common than electronic or, for old-school players, paper messages). I have tried to introduce the game to some friends who have flat-out balked at the amount of writing involved. In this sense roleplaying games like Dungeons and Dragons which require careful maintenance of a character sheet (or entire worlds if one is the DM) are a better example of the type of necessary disposition.

If you find this difficult
Although there really isn’t a way to make Diplomacy a faster paced game, there are options and variants which can reduce the burden of these aspects. If you find writing out orders according to a stringently enforced syntax to be frustrating, one can try playing with electronic engines (through the web such as with playdiplomacy.com or on one’s computer using an engine like jDip) which allow more intuitive point-and-click interfaces for orders.

Additionally, a variant which might be of interest is one which is usually called ‘Gunboat Diplomacy’ or ‘No-press Diplomacy’ and disallows direct communication between players (although much can be communicated through orders, much like bidding in Bridge). The pace of a gunboat game tends to be faster than standard games due to the lack of a distinct Diplomacy phase, and therefore might be of more interest to those who finding composing messages and maintaining relationships burdensome.

Players Must Handle Losing
This is a difficult characteristic to find, particularly among methodical game players (who tend to like games, and therefore play a lot of games and get rather good at them). However, there is no getting around the fact that Diplomacy is difficult. There are seven people playing who generally would all like to win, and thus the game becomes a volatile mixture of competing interests. Even the best players will face stagnation or outright elimination in a large number of games they play.

Although there are other games that support a large number of players (for example, Settlers of Catan with its expansion can have six players), those games are able to mitigate the fact that only one of those players can win by having every player simultaneously advancing and accomplishing small goals in a steady progression toward victory. In Diplomacy, however, it is a very real possibility that one’s forces will be whittled down before one is eliminated from the game entirely.

If you find this difficult
I am going to combine this section with the response to the next section, as they are closely related.

Players Must Handle Being Stabbed
Closely related to being able to lose without getting too upset is the capacity to be stabbed in the back (obviously metaphorically). Everyone who plays games knows that losing happens, but what makes Diplomacy different is that almost all losses come at the hands of a coalition of other players, with one or more of those players professing friendship (or, at the very least, ambivalence) right up until the devastating moment of the strike. In a game like Settlers of Catan a trade boycott might be enacted against the strongest player, or a player might spitefully refuse to trade with a particular opponent, but players cannot connive to directly destroy one another.

Of course, I’m not saying that one must like getting stabbed, but it is important to recognize that it is not (or, at least, should not be) a personal vendetta that has led to one player promising one set of moves and instead making another. There are all sorts of moral codes and guidelines that various enthusiasts have developed over the years outlining when one should and should not go about putting the metaphorical knife in another player’s back, but I feel such an exercise is largely useless. The only point I think that everyone needs to be aware of at the outset of the game is that it is a game. When France promises to support England's convoy into Belgium with the French fleet sitting in the English Channel, but then instead sails into a now vacant London, England will obviously be miffed. The important thing is to make sure that any hurt or anger experienced is transient; if one finds oneself holding grudges well past the end of the game or against the other player as a person rather than as a Diplomacy player, then perhaps Diplomacy is not a game one should be playing. Not only will it be hard to have fun if you are always finding yourself nurturing ill-will toward other players, but spoiling friendships over a board game would be a terrible waste.

If you find this difficult
Richard Sharp makes the claim in his book The Game of Diplomacy that ‘good ally’ players (those who make alliances and doggedly stick with them through the entire game, come what may) are beginners much more often than experienced players (the other extreme is that new players try to be too diplomatically slippery and make a lot of very poor stabs). While I think he is unfairly hostile to the ‘good ally’ style of play (there is nothing inherently wrong with it, so long as the alliance itself is a spontaneous entity contained to the single game and not simply two players deciding to ally in every game regardless of what happens), I do not think he is wrong about the demographics of ‘good ally’ players. Richard Sharp does not make any attempt to address the reason for such a tendency, though, and I think that is something which is important to bring up. Handling being stabbed is a psychological skill, and it takes practice. Beginners are less likely to recognize the stab as a pragmatic maneuver on the part of their erstwhile allies, and are instead more likely to interpret it as a personal betrayal. This, in turn, also makes beginners less likely to execute stabs themselves, since they see it as a personal affront to another player whom they hold no actual ill will against.

Therefore, I think one manner of getting over a difficulty with the harsher diplomatic aspects of the game is to play a few more games, but treat the games as practice and consciously start the game with low expectations. A good way to do this is to play online with players you have never met. Take some risks and see what happens. See if you can predict when your allies will backstab you, as predicting a stab is the first step in preventing it. Keep in mind that these games are practice, and in that way keep yourself emotionally distant. Once this has been accomplished in a few practice games, you will realize that there is no great shame in losing or being stabbed in the back, and it should be easier to maintain that resilience in other games of Diplomacy.

Note: If you are going to read Richard Sharp's book that I have linked to, it is also a good idea to read this review. As the reviewer points out, Sharp writes well, but is exceedingly biased toward the central powers of Germany and Austria-Hungary, to the point of advocating play styles that are not necessarily in the best interests of the players involved. It can easily come about that France and England (or France and Russia, England and Russia, or even France, England, and Russia if Germany is particularly unlucky) might find it in their best interest to attack Germany early and hard, despite Sharp's view that France and England must immediately be at each other's throats and it is foolhardy for Russia to do anything but yield gracefully to the German Empire.