Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Sparking Interest To Quantum Mechanics With Minecraft

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the get-them-where-they-live dept.

Google 71

jones_supa writes "If you want to find the computer geniuses of tomorrow, you could do worse than to check out which kids are playing Minecraft. In a Google+ post, the Google Quantum A.I. Lab Team says that they've released a mod called qCraft to enable kids (and adults) to play around with blocks that exhibit behaviors like quantum entanglement, superposition and observer dependency. qCraft obviously isn't a perfect scientific simulation, but it's a fun way for players to experience a few parts of quantum mechanics outside of thought experiments or dense textbook examples. The team doesn't know the full potential of what you can make with the mod, but they are excited to see what Minecraft's players can discover."

cancel ×

71 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Hmmm... (1)

Elminster Aumar (2668365) | about a year ago | (#45176995)

Depending on what exactly this mod does, it could yield some interesting outcomes when used against creepers from within my dirt house...

Re:Hmmm... (1)

Redmancometh (2676319) | about a year ago | (#45179095)

Well you should probably play on play.strongholdcraft.com. Pretty good server, just saying. I don't have the mod I'm just advertising with absolutely not segeuy.

More data mining by the goberment? (1)

MobSwatter (2884921) | about a year ago | (#45177003)

Now they can find prospective scientists to gag before they are ever scientists!

Re:More data mining by the goberment? (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about a year ago | (#45180397)

Don't worry, the parents of the dangerous ones are seeing other kids spending untold hours descended into Minecraft and ignoring the real world, and are keeping their own kids from using it.

The Minecraft operators of today will make good lab techs for the kids who are out talking about quantum nature with their dads while building treehouses.

can "do quantum mechanics" at school (2)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#45177053)

two-slit experiment, the three-polarizing filters experiment, an SCR.....many ways to "do quantum mechanics" on a school budget

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (1)

Chuckstar (799005) | about a year ago | (#45177491)

Neither the two-slit experiment nor the three-polarizing filters experiment show anything particularly quantum mechanical. Both would work just fine if light were a pure wave. I'm not really sure what experiments you could do with an SCR that would be particularly illuminating about quantum mechanics, but there might be some.

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#45177637)

Wrong. there is a quantum mechanical revealing version of double-slit and polarizing filter experiment that a purely wave-based energy transfer can't explain

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (2)

Chuckstar (799005) | about a year ago | (#45177785)

Please go on.

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (1)

lachlan76 (770870) | about a year ago | (#45178089)

One runs the experiment in the dark with a photographic film or movable photomultiplier behind the slits, allowing the observation of single photons. The density of the photons exhibits an interference pattern.

I've not done this experiment myself, but remember being told that it was possible using film during high school.

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (1)

Chuckstar (799005) | about a year ago | (#45178209)

But you have to have other reasons to believe there are only single photons in order for that experiment to show anything quantum. Without such other information, all you're showing is very low energy waves interfering with each other.

Re: can "do quantum mechanics" at school (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45178967)

Yes. the events are discrete but the aggregate shows interference. That is weird.

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45178987)

You've overlooked part of the experiment... In order to get the weird results that only quantum mechanics explains, you release the light one photon at a time and give each one time to hit the film before releasing another. Without quantum theory, you'd expect to get a wave pattern from each hole. Instead what you get is an interference pattern which is explained by current quantum theory as the photon traveled through both slits and interfered with itself.

The other odd thing is once you set this up, you can put a detector on each slit to determine which slit the photon goes through, and suddenly the interference pattern disappears.

You can say this makes no sense, but it helps to explain the way the quantum world works better than anything else we've got.

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45179037)

you release the light one photon at a time and give each one time to hit the film before releasing another.

This is well beyond "doing quantum mechanics on a school budget".

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#45180309)

no it isn't, as I have done it teaching school. Equipmment and supplies less than $40 in today's dollars.....

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45180409)

Explain how you released one photon at a time....

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (1)

lachlan76 (770870) | about a year ago | (#45194739)

You use a very highly attenuated light source, preferably pulsed.

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (1)

Chuckstar (799005) | about a year ago | (#45219877)

How do you know that's releasing single photons and not simply low-amplitude waves?

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (1)

Chuckstar (799005) | about a year ago | (#45219867)

How does one release one photon of light at a time in a way that shows a student there's only one photon being released?

As far as putting the detector in front of one hole and seeing the interference disappear, this is exactly what happens with waves. You don't need quantum mechanics to see that effect.

You have yet to show an experiment that shows anything particularly quantum.

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (1)

Goaway (82658) | about a year ago | (#45178241)

And you can't reasonably do it yourself, as it requires more sophisticated equipment than most people would have.

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (1)

daknapp (156051) | about a year ago | (#45177639)

Neither the two-slit experiment nor the three-polarizing filters experiment show anything particularly quantum mechanical. Both would work just fine if light were a pure wave.

Umm.... isn't that what quantum mechanics is about? That everything can be described by a wavefunction (i.e. as a "pure wave?") Even if it weren't so, the three-polarizer experiment is an excellent demonstration of the counterintuitive properties of projections, which is key to understanding QM.

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (1)

Chuckstar (799005) | about a year ago | (#45177823)

No. The "wave function" is only tangentially related to the concept of whether light acts like a wave, a particle, or has some kind of duality. It is tangentially related only because as you dig into the quantum mechanical nature of the universe, you end up with this statistical function that we happen to use the word "wave" in its name.

All one shows in those two experiments is that like acts like a wave.

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (1)

daknapp (156051) | about a year ago | (#45179265)

No. The "wave function" is only tangentially related to the concept of whether light acts like a wave, a particle, or has some kind of duality. It is tangentially related only because as you dig into the quantum mechanical nature of the universe, you end up with this statistical function that we happen to use the word "wave" in its name.

Wow. In the words of Pauli, that is not even wrong.

First off, the wavefunction is not a statistical function. And "wavefunction" includes that "wave" word for a very good reason. You are, I suspect, perfectly capable of reading an introductory quantum mechanics text. You just have chosen not to and yet feel the need to spout nonsense as if you were an expert.

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (1)

Chuckstar (799005) | about a year ago | (#45230059)

I have not just read a quantum mechanical text, but got an A in quantum mechanics. Nice snark, but that characterization of the wave function is simply 100% inaccurate.

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45181483)

Double-slit experiment [wikipedia.org]

The double-slit experiment, sometimes called Young's experiment (after Young's interference experiment), is a demonstration that matter and energy can display characteristics of both waves and particles, and demonstrates the fundamentally probabilistic nature of quantum mechanical phenomena.

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45181937)

It also works with electrons.

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (1)

RoboJ1M (992925) | about a year ago | (#45186847)

But does it work with tennis balls?

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (5, Funny)

gijoel (628142) | about a year ago | (#45177819)

They've already proven that chickens [youtube.com] are simultaneously a wave, and a particle.

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (1)

fatphil (181876) | about a year ago | (#45178087)

And if you want to do it in a computer environment, there's been a Perl module for 15 years:
http://search.cpan.org/~dconway/Quantum-Superpositions-1.03/lib/Quantum/Superpositions.pm

Re:can "do quantum mechanics" at school (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45187043)

I tried the two-slut experiment when I was in high school, but they still ended up going home with jocks, even after I paid for them and everything. It just doesn't work, everything is polarised against me!!!

No. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45177067)

"If you want to find the computer geniuses of tomorrow, you could do worse than to check out which kids are playing Minecraft."

No. That pretty much *is* the worst you can do to find "geniuses".

Re:No. (0)

melikamp (631205) | about a year ago | (#45178157)

No-no, running spyware just to kill time is what the computer geniuses of tomorrow are all about, or at least should be, according to Google's marketing department. God forbid they should stop playing a game for a second and write a free version of a popular non-free program.

Re:No. (1)

melikamp (631205) | about a year ago | (#45180673)

Google marketing bots are modding us down :) Artificial intelligence at work.

Re:No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45178665)

WRONG! The worst you could do trying to find geniuses is go to rehab. None of those fucks are smart.

Re:No. (1)

Redmancometh (2676319) | about a year ago | (#45179075)

I know this is a troll, and I'm being pedantic however...

Higher intelligence is linked to higher rates of drug experimentation and abuse.

Where's the minetest port of it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45177089)

Seriously google is going all proprietary nowadays :(

What happened to supporting open source google!?!?!?

Re:Where's the minetest port of it? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45177179)

what happened was, people sucked google`s cock too hard for too long, now they think they are god.

Surely you're joking... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45177093)

... Mr. Feynman. I bet he would've loved this.

educational potential (4, Insightful)

green is the enemy (3021751) | about a year ago | (#45177119)

It's a good idea to make Minceraft mods that expose certain laws of physics to interaction, even if not 100% rigorous and realistic. It could become a valuable teaching tool in the future for a large variety of physics and other scientific and engineering concepts. Somehow I feel Markus Persson intended this from the beginning.

Re:educational potential (3, Insightful)

z4ckpete (1108053) | about a year ago | (#45178073)

The redpower mod is how I learned how gates work and how they're combined to make RAM, adders, etc. I even made a simple calculator (which is not something I thought I'd have the attention span to do.)

Re:educational potential (1)

DMUTPeregrine (612791) | about a year ago | (#45185019)

Some of us crazy engineering types have made computers. In unmodded minecraft. Mostly because we can. It has NOT gates and OR gates, and that's all we really need. Myself, I implement cryptographic algorithms in Minecraft, when I have the time (rarely). There's no real use for it, and I'm under no illusion that they actually end up secure (a single creeper is a pretty good DOS attack) but it's fun to do.

It's a fun exercise to make a computer at the gate level.

Creepers (1)

phorm (591458) | about a year ago | (#45189099)

"a single creeper is a pretty good DOS attack"

So that's what happened to Facebook this morning. I always suspected it was full of creepers...

Palatable? (1, Offtopic)

Shavano (2541114) | about a year ago | (#45177159)

From the referenced article, "The engineered bacteria, dubbed genetically recoded organisms (GROs), have the added advantage of being resistant to many existing viruses. They are also less likely to escape the lab and survive than conventional genetically modified organisms, which should make them more palatable for commercial use."

I have no intention of palating any such thing.

Re:Palatable? (4, Funny)

jeffb (2.718) (1189693) | about a year ago | (#45177557)

You seem to have tunneled across from a neighboring thread.

Re:Palatable? (1)

mysidia (191772) | about a year ago | (#45178223)

Are they adding lorentz contraction and wormholes to minecraft as well?

Re:Palatable? (1)

Shavano (2541114) | about a year ago | (#45180277)

This is why Slashdot should allow posters to delete their own posts.

Cool game, not at all quantum (5, Informative)

iris-n (1276146) | about a year ago | (#45177207)

At first I was quite excited with the idea that someone was able to use quantum mechanical elements in a game. But of course, they were not able to do this. They just created a mod vaguely inspired by quantum mechanics, that helps to perpetuate the myths so beloved by the lay media.

The video linked just shows a dude running around, nothing very interesting. If you search youtube a bit, you can find videos talking about the mechanics they implemented. I found this one [youtube.com] , about the basic elements -- observation, superposition, and entanglement --, and this one [youtube.com] , with the extremely exciting title "quantum computers and teleportation".

Of course, what they call observation and superposition have nothing to do with the quantum concepts, they are just blocks that are different depending on which direction you look at them, and the "entanglement" block is just a glorifed telephone. Their quantum computer doesn't seem to do anything besides teleportation, which is Star Trek teleportation instead of quantum teleportation [xkcd.com] .

Admitedly, these guys set out do to a terribly difficult task: quantum mechanics is a bit subtle, and quite far from games. The only ones I can remember off the top of my mind are the CHSH game [hrcak.srce.hr] , which is about as exciting as tic-tac-toe, and a quantum strategy to cheat at bridge [wikipedia.org] , which requires you to do a nontrivial amount of maths (and is actually unpublished research =).

They have, nevertheless, failed. The mod looks cool as a game, though.

Re:Cool game, not at all quantum (4, Insightful)

bwcbwc (601780) | about a year ago | (#45177771)

Considering how Minecraft physics are almost laughable even in the Newtonian realm (for example, you can compress/store 27x64 cubic meters of cobblestone into a 1m cube/chest) nitpicking on the implementation of quantum concepts is a waste of time. This isn't intended as a rigorous treatment, it's an introduction to the concepts and how they would impact if they were visible at the macro scale. Personally, I think the implementation of superposition is reasonable - the block is in an undetermined state when it's not being observed and has it's state frozen by observation. Switching states after being observed isn't quite kosher without some other interaction, but I'll live with that for the sake of gaemeplay. Maybe a redstone signal could be required to destabilize the state of the block after being observed. The Observer dependency is a bit more problematic with its directional dependencies, but I can't think of a good way to implement that in a game. In theory we could use redstone as an activator again and selecting the state of the block probabilistically based on available observers and their distance from the block, but that's a fairly complex algorithm to run in realtime, updating every 1/20th of a second (the Minecraft tick/sampling rate) in Java.

The entanglement doesn't seem to properly describe the quantum phenomenon at all. Action at a distance != teleportation. The trouble is a realistic implementation would probably be exploitable in game terms. For example if you have 2 of those entanglement altars (or whatever they are called) and you place a block in one, I would expect to see the same block appear in the other one. Now how do you prevent people from using this to clone valuable blocks like diamond in game? In multiplayer, with 1 player at each "altar" you would have a very tight time sync requirement if both players tried to mine a block in their respective altars simultaneously.

An alternative mod spotlight.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HI-keffxmA [youtube.com]

Re:Cool game, not at all quantum (1)

reboot246 (623534) | about a year ago | (#45177927)

It's worse than that. You can fill an Ender Chest with all that cobblestone (or whatever), take another Ender Chest thousands of blocks away, and both chests will still contain the same items. The items are in two (or more) locations at the same time.

It comes in handy because you can fill the one you leave at your base with spare tools and extra food, and take another one to the mine. Then while you're away down in the mines you can use up the food and tools and replace them with items you've quarried. Go back to base and all the loot you've mined is already there!

Re:Cool game, not at all quantum (1)

Redmancometh (2676319) | about a year ago | (#45179083)

But...but it's magic!

Re:Cool game, not at all quantum (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#45179669)

they're no at the two places.

the opening to the chest is a teleport to the one place they're at ;). you can't use the items in two places at the same time.

Re:Cool game, not at all quantum (1)

iris-n (1276146) | about a year ago | (#45178299)

Come on, Minecraft does not pretend the implement classical physics.

The problem isn't lack of rigour, is that it gives you the wrong intuition. For example, the essential feature that distinguishes superposition from a classical mixture is that there is a basis in which the result of a measurement is deterministic, and from what I have seen this is not the case in the mod.

One way that it could be done: a "superposition" block, that can be prepared in the states |0>, |1>, |+>, or |->. If you look at it vertically, you measure in the Z basis, and if you continue measuring in the Z basis, the result doesn't change. If you then measure in the X basis, it's gonna collapse randomly to either |+> or |->, and it's gonna keep being this one as long as you keep looking at it vertically.

And this gives you also complementarity, which I think is one of the fundamental quantum concepts. The way the "observation" block was implemented simply makes no sense whatsoever. It's just a block that is different depending on the way you look. There is no complementarity between the aspects of the block, or anything to deal with the randomness of the quantum observation.

I don't understand what are you talking about teleportation. It doesn't sound to me very much related to real quantum teleportation. But I think the trouble with teleportation is that it is actually quite boring, and would serve no purpose in a game.

But it would be nice if we had some "quantum interaction" thingie (a CNOT) that would take two "superpositions" in different basis to an entangled state, and with this entangled state we could run the chsh game or ek91 qcrypto protocol.

Re:Cool game, not at all quantum (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45178407)

Sometimes doing something poorly is worse than doing nothing at all though. A large part of the problem with quantum mechanics is that people try to relate it to stuff they already know that implies something that is not accurate. There are some common analogies in pop-sci and the minds of many people that really misrepresents what the actual quantum mechanics is capable of. If you treat quantum entanglement as a telephone, then you are going to only re-enforce the false idea it allows communication without a classical channel, or the incorrect idea that changing one end makes itself know instantly to the other end. Likewise if they treat quantum teleportation just like Star Trek teleportation. If that is what they are doing, then they are not teaching new things to people, but instead strengthening the parts people get wrong about quantum mechanics.

Re:Cool game, not at all quantum (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#45179255)

moreover, most treasure boxes in most games work in a fashion that what is inside is generated only after you open the box. before that the box can have aything.

Hard to tell (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45177315)

Too early to say. It could go either way...

Is this what they wanted? (4, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year ago | (#45177435)

A half-dead blocky cat

Re:Is this what they wanted? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45179409)

that describes the kind of pussy most geeks get: It's either real but out-of-it, or fake and pixelated.

Re:Is this what they wanted? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45192123)

...That's nigh-impossible to tame.

Not at all sure if quantum enough. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45177471)

Me and some friends run a friends server in Hexxit already, so when it gets updated, should be a lot of fun.

That is if I don't do stupid things again, like storing backpacks in bags in backpacks for eternity and become a walking base and leave my main backpack in a box which gets exploded by a boss because I was too lazy to store it in a reinforced chest.

Either that or we will finally play Terraria update.

'to', 'with', what's the difference? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45177501)

Why are Americans so stupid? Why can't you understand simple prepositions? They're only little words...

You don't "spark interest" TO something, idiot. Unbelievable.

You "spark interest" IN something.

I am interested IN computers, not TO computers.

Fucking morons. What the hell happened to your country that half of you can't even understand what 'to', 'in', 'at', 'that', 'than', 'then', etc. mean? Fucking idiots.

Re:'to', 'with', what's the difference? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45177787)

Knowing how pissed you are about this puts me in the mood to pop down my nipple flaps.
Now tell me how much you hate me!

MMMM Feels good baby.

Re:'to', 'with', what's the difference? (1)

Redmancometh (2676319) | about a year ago | (#45179091)

How could anyone vote this down? Ah that earlier comment I posted is now regretted so so hard.

Interesting psychological experiment (2)

Chuckstar (799005) | about a year ago | (#45177505)

Here's an interesting possible psychological experiment. If you could design an game that utilized the rules of quantum mechanics, and you exposed young enough kids to it, would quantum mechanics become intuitive to them?

Quantum mechanics always seems so unintuitive. Is that because of nature or nurture? Have our brains evolved to understand a classical world? Or do we develop those intuitions as we experience the world?

Re:Interesting psychological experiment (2)

connor4312 (2608277) | about a year ago | (#45178021)

Plain ol' physics can be intuitive enough at times - our brains have not evolved to understand it at all, merely to survive. A very basic example is that the mass of an object does not change its rate of deceleration due to friction. F = ma, Force of friction = mgcos(theta), therefore mgcos(theta) = ma and gcos(theta) = ma. Another is that, despite what is seen in films, a swinging object is more likely to fall at the bottom of its path than the top. I would be very, very, very surprised if there was a game that could make a concept that goes far beyond such basics intuitive to the average person.

Re:Interesting psychological experiment (2)

iris-n (1276146) | about a year ago | (#45178237)

Well, you could say that doing a PhD in physics is playing such a game, and, sure enough, most physicists have a working intuition on how quantum mechanics work -- more on the level of given a description of a situation, they can tell more or less what will happen without doing the calculatios. Doing that part is not hard at all. Heck, this kind of intuition mathematicians develop about the most abstract and artificial objects.

But on a more fundamental level, I don't think it is possible to develop a good intuition, because our brains process information classically; we need well defined bits to reason about. But it might not even make sense to be able to reason quantumly, as the essential feature would be preserving the superposition of the systems we interact with. But to preserve the superposition is to have no memory of the interaction, so... it would be very weird indeed.

Try to imagine what a quantum computer would feel as it processes quantum information: it can only apply transformations to its information blindly, without ever reading out what its input actually is, until the very end of the calculation -- and even this final measurement only because we, humans, want it, it's perfectly legitimate to never have a final measurement at all.

I am a physicist, but these are only drunken speculations...

Re:Interesting psychological experiment (1)

vix86 (592763) | about a year ago | (#45179185)

I think you missed the point, and probably because the OP didn't carry the results of the 'experiment' out to its conclusions. The OP was suggesting that we use games to make concepts in quantum mechanics more intuitive to KIDS. I've always wondered if we can bring the concepts and teaching of harder concepts, to kids at younger ages, if this won't spur more quicker advances because less time is spent in the more valuable years simply trying to grasp current ideas. For example, there was probably a period where basic algebra was considered a "college subject" and not fit for teaching to anyone under the age of 18, yet in most places, the concepts are now taught in high school and sometimes even earlier. Calculus is now becoming a normal high school subject. If we can get these ideas into kids' minds at earlier ages, then later on expanding on the concepts won't be as time consuming and we can move past this period quicker and into more theoretical realms. My brother who is also a physicist often wonders if we could make Lie Algebra regular 12th grade curriculum, what that might do to the advances in math and physics.

Re:Interesting psychological experiment (1)

lxs (131946) | about a year ago | (#45178875)

You don't need to go as far as quantum physics. Human intuition on physics is very limited. Even something as simple as a toy gyroscope makes no intuitive sense.

MineCraft is a great vehicle to promote this (2)

Trax3001BBS (2368736) | about a year ago | (#45178395)

or really anything...

I made a post for a website on how to get a mob spawner in MineCraft; part of the post included
a 4 second video showing the process. Lots of pictures but one video.

I'd forgotten all about it until the e-mail started and did it come, a 4 second video nobody likes
now has 420K views. I've much better videos, of glitches, all sorts of stuff but none anywhere close to
the reception (views) of this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvxY-9DC2rQ [youtube.com]

Was cool the hate line was red and long, called a saber for the longest time. Ads are not allowed
or seen, practicing what I preach.

Minecraft has a heck of a following of all ages, as it's very simple to learn yet you can get very complex with; it as Google is showing.

Re:MineCraft is a great vehicle to promote this (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45179599)

Probably the video got so many dislikes because it's useless. There's no explanation whatsoever, and before you're tuned in your attention to the video, it's over.

Re:MineCraft is a great vehicle to promote this (1)

Trax3001BBS (2368736) | about a year ago | (#45208003)

Probably the video got so many dislikes because it's useless. There's no explanation whatsoever, and before you're tuned in your attention to the video, it's over.

Wasn't meant to of been viewed by the public it was part of a post, but I didn't care who saw it.

There was a description that I kept upto date but then I had to follow the website it was posted on.

So many people hit the website only to find you had to join to view it, that that one post was viewable without joining,
so I went with that format. Once again one must join to view the post so I haven't bothered updating it.

Also it was a glitch in either the beta MineCraft or MineCraft and some MOD, you could only do it with that version.

People felt taken, as it didn't explain anything -never took the time to read the description. The dislike bar was called
a light saber for the longest time till it even lost that resemblance.

Just amazed me so many people viewed that video while this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K05Z75-qR9U [youtube.com]
saw less than 9K views and it had all the key words to be a hit: Black ops COD7 Glitch Crisis map - PC just the word glitch should of surpassed
400K and you can tell I actually put some time into that one - it really was the first real glitch found with CoD7 - (I call first Glitch on Black Ops)

Yes MineCraft has a following, and the google analytics told a lot about the people (people actually log into youtube to view videos).
There are three age spikes, Teens, late 30's, and 50 years + old almost all male. In real life those spikes mean so much if you think about them in relation to games.

game (1)

sumitjadhav137 (3012081) | about a year ago | (#45187143)

nice game
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>