Ian Guthridge.com


Back to Updates

by Ian on Sep.01, 2010, under Projects, Rants, Sticky Situation

Well! Back to school means back to work! I have about 10 weeks left to finish the biggest project of all time!!!

Ok, so it isn’t quite that big… It is big enough though. Unfortunately I can’t really share a video of the game itself, so instead I’ll share an older engine test video with you guys:

In case you can’t tell, the pink box is a button. It is pretty much triggered whenever it overlaps with a non-static object. Pretty cool, huh?

Hopefully I can show you guys something more relevant in the next update. Back to work!

  • Share/Bookmark
Leave a Comment :, , , more...

Why Starting is Hard [for Me]

by Ian on Dec.30, 2009, under Projects, Rants

I hate starting projects.

The first line of code typed, the first paragraph of an essay or a story authored, or the first scribble on a fresh sheet of paper starts defining the product; it destroys the superposition of the possible things the project may become. With each stroke of the key or pen, thousands upon thousands of outcomes are pruned away.

I am destroying infinite works that could have been to create just one. Is this one better than those which will never be? Does it deserve its existence more than its brothers do?

I hope so.

  • Share/Bookmark
1 Comment : more...

Quick Rant

by Ian on Oct.06, 2009, under Rants


(continue reading…)

  • Share/Bookmark
Leave a Comment :, more...

HLSL and Me

by Ian on Aug.26, 2009, under Rants

Similarities to Smalltalk:

  1. The documentation is uselessly vauge.
  2. It has very limited development tools
  3. People who can’t use it right think they can and post tutorials… those who truely know it sit back and laugh. They didn’t get help, so why should we?


  1. HLSL is useful!

On a more serious note, HLSL, or High Level Shader Language, is actually really cool.  Even in shader model 2, where I am limited to 64 arithmatic instructions, is extreamely powerful!  Once you get used to it of course…

You just have to think in vectors!

  • Share/Bookmark
Leave a Comment :, , more...

The Promise of The Internet

by Ian on Jun.08, 2009, under Links, Rants

The Internet doesn’t seem to get a lot of love.  Popular opinion ranges from it being a useless toy populated by distractions like Twitter, Facebook, and Myspace to malevolent entity filled with spam, viruses, and porn.

While there is a lot of crap on the Internet, if you take the time to dig through it, you’ll be rewarded with some amazing creations that could only exist on the Internet.  For instance, Thru You brings remixing to a whole new level!  The creator, Kutiman, brings together unrelated Youtube clips to create entirely new musical compositions.

The amazing thing isn’t that he was able to make such an great piece of art. The amazing thing is it shows  how many different creative works exist on the Internet for free, and the power of being able to search, edit, comment, mark-up, and distribute uninhibited by the walls of traditional media.  I hope the Internet stays free, because there is no other forum for creativity that matches the it.

Where else can you find something like this:

It makes me wish I knew how to play an instrument…


(I meant to do a write-up about my experience at the Renaissance Fair last weekend, but I can’t find the cable to connect my camera to my computer, so that will have to wait.)

  • Share/Bookmark
Leave a Comment :, more...

Language: It is all Meaningless

by Ian on May.28, 2009, under Rants

Do words have an intrinsic meaning?  Take a simple word such as tree.  Without context does this word mean anything?  To answer that we first have to create a coherent definition of meaning.  The American Heritage Dictionary defines meaning, as it relates to this subject, as “Something that one wishes to convey, especially by language.”   The key part of that statement is “that one wishes,” implying that a statement, and therefore its constituent words, cannot mean anything on their own.   

You can try to counter this by claiming that definitions constitute meaning. The issue I take with this is that a definition isn’t grounded in anything; it is just another statement consisting of words.  Each of these words has its own definition consisting of more words; each having their own definitions.  A cycle endlessly repeating, never yielding any meaning.  That is, unless it is examined by someone who then provides a necessary context for those words to live, thereby providing them with meaning, albeit only an abstraction of whatever the originator of those words meant. 

Language does not represent thought; instead it abstracts thought.  If it did represent thought, then some fundamental unit of language would have to map in a one to one relationship with thought.  This relationship would be like an ideal hash map, a list of data referenced by unique keys.  Unfortunately like a hash map, given a finite set of keys collisions become inevitable as the set of information increases in size.  So is there an infinite, or large enough, set of unique morphemes, words, sentences, etc. that could theoretically provide us with a truly unique mapping between words and thoughts.

(continue reading…)

  • Share/Bookmark
Leave a Comment :, , , more...


by Ian on Apr.11, 2009, under Rants

“How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, ‘This is better than we thought! The universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant. God must be even greater than we dreamed.’ Instead they say, ‘No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way.’”

-Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot: A Vision Of The Human Future In Space

I apologize in advance for the often tangental nature of my ranting.

I have come to the sad realization that I would not struggle with my acceptance of Christianity if it was not for other “Christians”.  (This is really about religion and beliefs in general, I just specify Christianity because that is the belief set I most closely associate myself with.)

I have always felt that one’s beliefs were a personal issue and one should not attempt to impose them on others.  This behavior has often caused people who do not know me well to assume that I hold some set of beliefs, or lack thereof, often attributed to a group I belong to.  This is prejudice.  When one makes an judgement purely on past experience without acquiring new, more accurate data; that person is a bigot.  I make this assertion not to claim that I have ever been discriminated against, but to merely state that people often make biased judgements of other people without even realizing it.  In short, my omission of my beliefs does not mean that I do not have them, just that I do not feel that you need to know them.

I say this because I am tired of people telling me that I am going to hell because I support some scientific theory X.  I am tired of people accusing me of being closed minded, or not considering the possibility of something because I want evidence.  I am tired of people claiming something is “only a theory”, that X is true “only as far as we know”, or that “scientists could be wrong”.  Yes, science is not absolute.  Yes, science does change.  Yes, scientists often are wrong.  No, I do not believe I know everything.  I believe I have a reasonable layman’s understanding  (I can make it through a fairly technical paper on most subjects given enough time) of currently accepted scientific theory (and the corresponding evidence) and can therefore make fairly confident assertions that the science is correct unless overwhelming evidence to the contrary is presented.  Why?  Because science consists of long term experiments that produce striking results.  Because science repeatedly tests concepts that are “common knowledge”, and these “silly” experiments sometimes demonstrate a massive misconception about the world.  THAT is why I place “faith” in the scientific process.  THAT is why I am “close minded”. THAT is why I believe that God created a universe that relies on underlying, immutable physical laws and that modern scientific theory is our best approximation of those laws.  I DO accept that there is a LOT science has yet to explain.  Based on all my observations thus far, it is far more likely that an unexplained event has a physical explanation rather than a paranormal one.  The physical explanation may be very counter-intuitive and unconventional, but I believe it exists and any explanation that does not account for known physical laws is. complete. bullcrap.  

(continue reading…)

  • Share/Bookmark
Leave a Comment :, , more...

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!