[HN Gopher] We made an animated movie in 8kB
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       We made an animated movie in 8kB
        
       Author : laurentlb
       Score  : 522 points
       Date   : 2024-01-24 18:46 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.ctrl-alt-test.fr)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.ctrl-alt-test.fr)
        
       | MrLeap wrote:
       | I didn't care for the ending. He was just a hungry dude.
        
         | froddd wrote:
         | Ruined the whole tech achievement for me. Great technical
         | approach, rather slim on the creativity. Shame.
        
           | qingcharles wrote:
           | As an ex-demoscene coder, this sums up pretty much most
           | demoscene releases o_O
        
         | djmips wrote:
         | It's a very lazy ending. Very derivative of early shock
         | animations like Bambi meets Godzilla but with less class.
        
       | Joeboy wrote:
       | It's a bit more than 8kB, but if you like unexpectedly dark
       | animated movies about sheep I recommend the Blender Foundation's
       | open movie Cosmos Laundromat[0]. Their movies always seem to be
       | weirdly dark for tech demos for some reason. I thought this one
       | in particular came out really well.
       | 
       | [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-rmzh0PI3c
        
         | vanderZwan wrote:
         | "Weirdly dark" is a pretty apt description of the Dutch sense
         | of humor, I suspect it's mainly because of that.
        
         | latexr wrote:
         | Be forewarned: the movie ends with a "to be continued" and the
         | wikipedia page reads:
         | 
         | > The film was originally intended to kickstart a feature-
         | length film. A short film sequel was written and designed but
         | never brought to production. In 2020, [the producer] announced
         | that the one film would be the total of the project.
         | 
         | So if you don't feel like having the disappointment of an
         | intriguing concept that you'll never find the resolution for,
         | maybe skip it.
        
           | hombre_fatal wrote:
           | Well, it's still a cool video. If you (the same "you" as in
           | my parent comment) can't handle a 12 minute animation about a
           | sheep never reaching its final resolution, maybe you need the
           | practice. ;)
        
           | vanderZwan wrote:
           | I still hope there will be more Agent 327 videos some day.
           | Either in short form or as feature-length.
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mN0zPOpADL4
        
           | justsomehnguy wrote:
           | >So if you don't feel like having the disappointment of an
           | intriguing concept that you'll never find the resolution for,
           | maybe skip it.
           | 
           | Life is full of unresolved resolutions. If you would always
           | skip them then
        
             | latexr wrote:
             | Oh, come on, what a ridiculous comparison. As if deciding
             | to skip a 10 minute short would reflect in any way on one's
             | life decisions. This website, man. No wonder the wider
             | internet makes fun of Hacker News. For crying out loud.
        
         | jasomill wrote:
         | On a random related note, courtesy of Netflix, the entire movie
         | is available for download from S3 as a series of 18,192
         | uncompressed EXR images[1], which came in handy when I was
         | experimenting with HDR in DaVinci Resolve.
         | 
         | [1] https://opencontent.netflix.com/#h.uyzoa2bivz2j
        
       | maxglute wrote:
       | Demoscene videos are pretty fun and criminally under viewed.
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLRQwR4-_0PR9HBI_GZs1n...
       | 
       | I wish there was a channel like retro game mechanics that break
       | them down with good visuals.
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | When we solve AGI, I'd love to see demoscene for intelligence.
         | How much could you compress it?
         | 
         | From there, how small can you make a world of mutually
         | intelligent agents?
         | 
         | Edit: all these downvoters - don't you dream? There are so many
         | crazy and fantastical things that await.
        
           | maxglute wrote:
           | I can't wait to eave drop on my smart fridge making small
           | talk with my smart toaster in the morning. Only slightly
           | joking.
        
             | hinkley wrote:
             | Can I just ask one question?
             | 
             | Would anyone like any toast?
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhnN4eUiei4
        
             | romanhn wrote:
             | Pass the butter! https://youtu.be/3ht-ZyJOV2k
        
           | dtx1 wrote:
           | Funnily enough thats Linda what's happening with llms.
        
           | roywiggins wrote:
           | > When we solve AGI
           | 
           | I hope we don't, tbh.
           | 
           | Exhibit A: https://qntm.org/mmacevedo
        
             | fastball wrote:
             | Another[1] relevant short-story! Also, I don't think
             | MMAcevedo qualifies as an AGI, he/it is rather a VBI
             | (Virtual Brain Image).
             | 
             | [1] https://www.fortressofdoors.com/four-magic-words/
        
             | because_789 wrote:
             | Holy cow, thank you! I read this once, a year or two back,
             | and have been trying to find it again but without luck.
             | What a cool text.
        
         | sitzkrieg wrote:
         | i agree, seeing the guts of something like .kkrieger would be
         | awesome
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.kkrieger
        
           | lifthrasiir wrote:
           | Nostalgia Nerd's video on .kkrieger [1], produced with a help
           | from original developers, would be a good start.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bD1wWY1YD-M
        
           | stijnstijn wrote:
           | A lot of related code was released a couple of years ago:
           | https://github.com/farbrausch/fr_public
        
         | sanroot99 wrote:
         | Reminds me of shader wars
        
         | onion2k wrote:
         | Feels like an opportunity to share my all time favorite demo
         | ... Intrinsic Gravity by Still https://youtu.be/-ZxPhDC-r3w
        
           | jsheard wrote:
           | Have you seen the remix where it was ported to a Pebble
           | smartwatch and Gameboy duo?
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UC-ru1P3GVo
        
             | onion2k wrote:
             | I haven't seen that before. That's brilliant. :)
        
         | altacc wrote:
         | Watching YouTube videos of demos feels like cheating but happy
         | they exist as I'm a bit more reluctant to download & run random
         | exes than I was 20 years ago! Before the videos were available
         | you had to wait quite a bit whilst it unpacked and processed
         | before you were either dazzled or disappointed. We used to
         | watch quite a lot of demos as part of our chill out sessions as
         | they were the perfect accompaniment to our mental state.
        
       | doublerabbit wrote:
       | I was going to post my 8kb favourite but then discovered it was
       | 64kb. Been a while.
       | 
       | Anyway :https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1dcrV_7JpXQ
        
         | laurentlb wrote:
         | A classic!
         | 
         | You may be interested in discovering some more recent 64kB
         | intros: https://64k-scene.github.io
        
         | 12_throw_away wrote:
         | So then I'm going to post my favorite 4k [1], which even if you
         | ignore the file size, is just a very cool use of fractals.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0w_xEUoK79o
        
         | magicalhippo wrote:
         | I've always been partial to TBL's Stash[1] and Jizz[2], tho I'm
         | a sucker for oldschool goa. Both a "massive" 64k each, still...
         | 
         | edit: fun fact, the demos run fine on modern systems (at least
         | Windows) if you run the ixalance versions[3].
         | 
         | [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfbjiTrctJs
         | 
         | [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXgseVYvhek
         | 
         | [3]: https://libsdl.org/projects/ixalance/
        
           | cygenb0ck wrote:
           | oh sweet memories <3
        
       | olddustytrail wrote:
       | I kind of like these things, but (unless I missed it!) they don't
       | seem to specify their constraints. So clearly the graphics
       | wouldn't fit in 8kB, so what does that mean?
       | 
       | It could be a cool SDL competition where you allow a version and
       | a set of assets and then let slip the dogs of war.
        
         | kristianp wrote:
         | If you look in the download link they give [1], the zip file
         | contains multiple different 8kB exe files, for different
         | resolutions. So it seems the target is executable size.
         | 
         | [1] http://aduprat.com/pub/The_Sheep_and_the_Flower.zip
        
         | jsheard wrote:
         | For PC intros the rules are generally that your 8kB (or
         | whatever size) executable has to run alone, with no other
         | files, on a bone stock install of Windows with no internet
         | access. That means that yes, the graphics and sound are all
         | generated on the fly by the 8kB exe.
        
           | olddustytrail wrote:
           | But stock version of Windows has a ton of stuff you can use.
           | All sorts of graphics and audio files. And that again depends
           | on which version you're basing it on.
           | 
           | I think it would be cool to run a competition with more
           | specific (and platform independent) set of constraints. I
           | guess I should spend more time thinking about how to organise
           | it myself than complaining that no-one else has!
        
             | msk-lywenn wrote:
             | It's usually forbidden to rely on those files as they can
             | disappear with updates of windows. The best example I can
             | think of is General MIDI. The files were avaialble with XP
             | and below, and is now often explicitly forbidden because
             | it's not available anymore or not in the same form making
             | demos incompatible.
             | 
             | It's also often forbidden to use the filename to store
             | data. There was that case of the 256B demo that relied on a
             | deep hierarchy of directories to work :)
        
               | jsheard wrote:
               | Indeed, the rules for the Revision party where this was
               | released require the intro to run on Windows 10 (so
               | implicitly no MIDI) and specify that the sample music
               | that comes with Windows will be deleted.
               | 
               | https://2023.revision-party.net/competitions/pc/
        
             | jsheard wrote:
             | There are competitions for all sorts of retro computer and
             | game console platforms which are "purer" in the sense that
             | there's little to no operating system at all, so the demo
             | has to be programmed against the bare metal. That's not
             | feasible for modern PCs though, you _need_ the OS
             | infrastructure and drivers to abstract over the variety of
             | hardware.
             | 
             | Or if you're web-inclined you could use the browser as your
             | OS:
             | 
             | https://0b5vr.com/domain/domain.html /
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2COWeeEqTs
             | 
             | https://fms-cat.github.io/condition/pages /
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co42e8ErbaY
        
             | ogurechny wrote:
             | Has been done and discussed (flamed) ages ago, in the early
             | Windows demos era. An operating system has a lot of "free"
             | data, graphical or otherwise (from wallpapers to icon
             | resources), which can be used directly or processed into
             | something else. The code to access them cam become too big,
             | but hacks are possible. There's also a question of fonts.
             | Is it OK to use them to "just put some text on screen", is
             | it OK to use them as a source of all kinds of curves? It is
             | hard to define where "the program" ends, and the rest of
             | the system starts. After all, they all need to load
             | libraries to interact with GPU into their process space.
             | Those libraries have debug functions, example data, and
             | other junk which is not used to put pictures on screen, but
             | is available. Then what if a tiny application links to 50
             | system libraries only to have a database of potentially
             | suitable data sequences here and there?
             | 
             | And long before that, even regular software on
             | microcomputers struggling to save each byte relied on known
             | values being in known locations in ROM. It worked, because
             | each device came from the factory with the same firmware,
             | and it could never ever be changed for the reason I've just
             | mentioned.
             | 
             | The solution turns out to be pretty simple: if you think
             | you're smart, other smart people will study your trick, and
             | decide whether it's impressive, or just a one-time joke.
             | Formal rules for demoparties don't mention many possible
             | "size extending techniques" because it's generally accepted
             | that they won't help much compared to what can be done in
             | the same amount of bytes directly by a competent author.
        
             | GuB-42 wrote:
             | Reusing graphics and audio is usually not done, except for
             | fonts, and here, it is not the case since there is no text.
             | 
             | Also, if you look at the rules for the compo this intro
             | took part of, most obvious reuse of what's on Windows is
             | not allowed: https://2023.revision-
             | party.net/competitions/pc/
             | 
             | In reality, the multi-gigabyte OS everyone seems to
             | complain about when a sizecoding demoscene production is
             | shown is mostly there as a compatibility layer. You simply
             | can't use modern GPUs without it. One could conceivably do
             | all that on the bare metal with not that much difference in
             | size, the problem is that there is no powerful enough bare
             | metal platform where you can do that.
             | 
             | If you prefer to work closer to the hardware, that's what
             | the "oldschool" and "wild" categories are for. But these
             | are more about overcoming the limited abilities of these
             | platforms than pure sizecoding.
        
         | laurentlb wrote:
         | The result is an 8kB Windows executable file. It is self-
         | contained: there's only one .exe file, that generates
         | everything (without resource files). You can download it and
         | execute it (it requires a relatively recent GPU).
         | 
         | I'll see how I can edit the text to make this more obvious.
        
           | olddustytrail wrote:
           | I understand that. I guess I'm complaining that I need to
           | download several GBs of Windows that I don't use in order to
           | run this 8kB file...
        
           | jll29 wrote:
           | Wow, it's not even an ASCII art movie!
           | 
           | Thanks for uploading a Youtube video since a certain legacy
           | operating system is generally not available (by design) in my
           | household.
        
         | mrb wrote:
         | " _clearly the graphics wouldn 't fit in 8kB_" is a nice
         | compliment for the authors - because yes they did fit
         | everything in 8kB :)
        
       | tiffanyh wrote:
       | Has anyone been able to download it?
       | 
       | The download keeps failing, and the file is already 165kb
       | (zipped) partially downloaded.
       | 
       | So is this truly 8kb?
        
         | mrb wrote:
         | Yes I downloaded the ZIP, here I put it on my website:
         | https://www.zorinaq.com/pub/The_Sheep_and_the_Flower.zip
         | (SHA256: 91327f463ff5edaae89e1e6fd386f313c33d1f171c84f9e843e263
         | af3d034321) After extracting it contains these files (the zip
         | archive is large because it contains a ~200 kB JPEG
         | screenshot):                 8159 bytes:
         | The_sheep_and_the_flower-1280x720.exe       8143 bytes:
         | The_sheep_and_the_flower-1920x1080.exe       8159 bytes:
         | The_sheep_and_the_flower-3840x2160.exe       8157 bytes:
         | The_sheep_and_the_flower-640x360.exe       206507 bytes:
         | The_sheep_and_the_flower.jpg       1014 bytes:
         | The_sheep_and_the_flower.nfo
        
         | skrebbel wrote:
         | Yes. The zip is bigger than 8kb because it includes a
         | screenshot and builds for various screen resolutions.
         | 
         | Try the scene.org download link here
         | https://demozoo.org/productions/322612/
        
         | laurentlb wrote:
         | On Chrome, the download works better when I right-click and
         | select "Save link as". Chrome mentions that it's not secure
         | because it's http. I've just uploaded the file here, maybe it
         | will work better: https://ctrl-alt-
         | test.fr/dl/The_Sheep_and_the_Flower.zip
         | 
         | If you open the zip file, you'll see multiple files. The
         | biggest (200kB) is a screenshot for reference. It's not used,
         | you can delete it. We didn't include a resolution selector in
         | the executable file; instead we provided one binary for each
         | resolution (e.g. The_sheep_and_the_flower-1920x1080.exe).
        
           | ant6n wrote:
           | It's a kind of ironic beauty to minify this project all the
           | way down to 8kb for example by developing a minifying source-
           | to-source compiler, and then using a parameter-by-copied-
           | executable scheme for the screen resolution.
        
             | lifthrasiir wrote:
             | I was curious of that too. Technically it should be
             | possible to read the executable file name (via
             | `GetModuleFileName`, because you don't necessarily have
             | `argv`) and pick the resolution accordingly. But that would
             | take at least 30 more bytes in my wild guess...
        
               | laurentlb wrote:
               | For the justification: it's the standard approach when
               | doing 4kB intros, we just copied it. At the end, we had
               | ~30 spare bytes, so we could have looked for an
               | alternative.
        
               | lifthrasiir wrote:
               | To be clear: I'm completely okay with that! Early 64K
               | demos didn't have that either anyway.
        
         | neckro23 wrote:
         | The link is simply malformed a bit (http instead of https),
         | it's available (from the original site) here:
         | https://aduprat.com/pub/The_Sheep_and_the_Flower.zip
         | 
         | It's truly 8kb, the zip contains several versions for different
         | resolutions and a relatively large screenshot.
        
         | doodpants wrote:
         | I downloaded it just fine using Firefox. However, when I
         | unzipped it, and then opened the resulting folder, there were
         | no .exe files inside. A moment later, Norton reassured me that
         | it had automatically deleted the malicious .exe files, and I
         | was safe.
         | 
         | So I disabled Norton, and unzipped the file again. This time
         | there were four .exe files, each 8kb in size, for running the
         | movie in various resolutions.
         | 
         | I double-clicked one of them. It immediately reduced the
         | resolution of my displays, and moved/rearranged all of my open
         | windows, putting them all onto the right-hand display. I heard
         | music, but saw no video, and panicked and hit Alt-F4 to stop
         | it. My display resolutions were restored, but I had to manually
         | put all my windows back where they belonged.
         | 
         | Perhaps I should have trusted Norton.
        
       | Lumocra wrote:
       | This is amazing, love how funny and creative the story is given
       | the constraints! Truly impressive.
       | 
       | Would love to hear more technical details on how corners have
       | been cut to shave off some bytes.
        
         | laurentlb wrote:
         | To see micro-optimizations and how we iterated, you may look at
         | the history of the repository: https://github.com/ctrl-alt-
         | test/mouton/commits/main/
         | 
         | There's a commit (https://github.com/ctrl-alt-
         | test/mouton/commit/79d2d1eab7a22...) where we save many bytes
         | by removing a performance optimization. We originally wanted to
         | keep it, but we realized we were short on bytes and that
         | optimization was not required on recent-ish GPUs.
        
           | djmips wrote:
           | The audio is more enjoyable to me than the visuals. Good job
           | with that.
        
       | Fredkin wrote:
       | When connecting to this site I get SSL_ERROR_RX_RECORD_TOO_LONG.
       | Also malwarebytes blocks it. Odd because it seems to be clean
       | here
       | 
       | https://www.virustotal.com/gui/url/5dc759a5c5f69aec6c7ba1959...
        
       | walth wrote:
       | Sloot lives!!!
       | 
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sloot_Digital_Coding_System
        
         | latexr wrote:
         | > In 1999, just days before the conclusion of a contract to
         | sell his invention, Sloot died suddenly of a heart attack. The
         | source code was never recovered, and the technique and claim
         | have never been reproduced or verified.
         | 
         | What rotten luck, for everyone.
        
           | fouc wrote:
           | > but a key piece of the technology, a compiler stored on a
           | floppy disk,[9] had disappeared and, despite months of
           | searching, was never recovered.[10]
           | 
           | spooky
        
         | fareesh wrote:
         | Killed by a time traveller. That technology led to an
         | apocalyptic period
        
           | MenhirMike wrote:
           | Always remember: If you think the current world is bleak and
           | problematic, ask yourself how many time travelers prevented
           | an even worse situation.
        
             | explaininjs wrote:
             | Who's to say we're living in the corrected branch? Commit
             | fae12 doesn't benefit from a patch being applied to its
             | great grand parent and the history since then being rebased
             | off of that.
        
               | bemusedthrow75 wrote:
               | Lordy, I hope this is actually a branch in a corrupted
               | filesystem.
               | 
               | It doesn't speak well of time travellers if this is a
               | corrected branch.
        
             | oneshtein wrote:
             | Physic is not random. If time traveller is here now, then
             | it was here forever, because to be here at time T, it must
             | be here at time T-1 too. Even if we develop a time machine
             | to change Universe at time T, then change will propagate in
             | both T+1 and T-1 directions. Timetravelers are our brothers
             | and sisters.
        
               | throwaway290 wrote:
               | > If time traveller is here now, then it was here
               | forever, because to be here at time T, it must be here at
               | time T-1 too
               | 
               | If you believe in non-random deterministic universe then
               | at T-1 (and always since big bang) traveler was already
               | here in the shape of ancestors, just like at some point
               | you existed in your mom and dad and before that in
               | whatever big bang elements etc.
               | 
               | No energy is being added or removed in the system
        
             | yterdy wrote:
             | In my most Hotep-y daydreams, I've sometimes wondered if
             | this is the timeline where a group of scrappy, persecuted
             | white dudes traveled back in time to make sure that Western
             | civilization would become the primary world power (instead
             | of, like, an expansionist ancient China or Egypt or
             | Persia).
             | 
             | (inb4 GGS rec)
        
               | MenhirMike wrote:
               | I would say that this sounds like a great idea for a
               | novel, and then I remembered that Orson Scott Card
               | already wrote Pastwatch :)
               | 
               | What's GGS? Only found Guns, Germs, and Steel in that
               | context, is that the one?
        
               | yterdy wrote:
               | Oh, that's good to know, though I'd love to see someone
               | other than Card take a swing at it.
               | 
               | >What's GGS? Only found Guns, Germs, and Steel in that
               | context, is that the one?
               | 
               | You got it!
        
               | MenhirMike wrote:
               | Yeah, it's exactly what you would expect someone like
               | Card to write, but if you go into it knowing the views of
               | its author, it almost becomes like a parody of his
               | politics and becomes quite an enjoyable read on "I wonder
               | how many crazy reasons he's going to bring up why
               | Columbus was actually a hero".
        
         | jancsika wrote:
         | My quick and dirty interpretation after skimming that article:
         | he misrepresented a hashing algo to non-technical people who
         | didn't understand that a) it's a one-way function and b) even
         | if it weren't, multiple inputs can still map to the same hash.
        
           | Nition wrote:
           | There's some more info/speculation on it here:
           | https://www.spronck.net/sloot.html
        
             | kaetemi wrote:
             | That reads just like they're talking about a generative AI
             | model.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | Not at that point in time.
        
             | jacquesm wrote:
             | > In his prototype, he faked his invention, which is why he
             | refused to let anyone near it, and answered only in
             | mystical vagueness to questions.
             | 
             | I was the happy attendant to a demo given to a wealthy
             | friend who was asked to invest (alongside Pieper). I'll let
             | Jan take the secret to his grave but the writer of TFA is
             | spot on, he faked it, but he _really_ did believe that he
             | could make it work. It 's a very sad story.
        
               | anonzzzies wrote:
               | I met him a few times and after his death, I was
               | contacted by a 'friend' (you never know; I just know for
               | sure that he lived around the block from him, as did I at
               | the time in that miserable town) of his who wanted to
               | hire me to figure out the secret. They all thought it was
               | real. But they missed the background to reason about it
               | correctly, like Kolmogorov complexity. I don't think he
               | was really seeing it as faking; he just thought he needed
               | some more time to make it generally applicable, but the
               | idea was basically a re-applied compression; you had 4
               | files; the original video, the compression exe, the
               | decompression exe and the decompression data file. The
               | compression would apply a (fairly basic) compression
               | algorithm which was more or less of the type 'replace a
               | pattern of x bytes by 1 byte'. That mapping was written
               | to the decompression data file and repeated until the
               | compressed video was _very_ small; however, the
               | decompression data file would be very large (similar,
               | obviously, to the video(s) sizes together). His secret
               | computer had a storage with the decompression data file
               | and the idea was that he would, in time, find the ideal
               | decompression data file (the Golden mapping or some such)
               | that would be small-ish and yet would be able to compress
               | 1000s+ of videos very efficiently. Which indeed would be
               | enough, but it 's not possible of course. To be clear;
               | they believed they could ultimately have one few mb data
               | file but with videos of 64kb by re-applying the encoding,
               | hitting of some magic bag of mappings that would be found
               | always repeating in very large files, thus making the
               | compressed file smaller and smaller and smaller.
               | 
               | I don't know really how far he really got with this and
               | no-body knows or ever will know. I would wager that IF
               | they (the investors, people the investors hired etc)
               | found that floppy disk, they would make it disappear due
               | to the enormous embarrassment if that would leak out.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | You are _extremely_ close to having it all figured out.
               | My then friend Hugo Krop[1] realized that something didn
               | 't add up but also missed the required background which
               | is where I was brought in. I figured out how the demo was
               | rigged and told him, that was the end of that.
               | Interestingly: Pieper _did_ go for it, and Pieper wasn 't
               | exactly dumb himself. I never really got that bit, he
               | must have realized it was a scam. The demo was held in a
               | building on the Sarphatikade in Amsterdam.
               | 
               | [1] Of 'TextLite' fame, deceased, very colorful, and
               | later on a scammer in his own right.
        
               | anonzzzies wrote:
               | > Sarphatikade
               | 
               | Yeah that demo was somewhat legendary back then. But how
               | you figured he did the demo? Because although I met
               | Sloot, he never demo'd it to me and I never saw a live
               | demo (not on video either; why _are_ there no videos;
               | Pieper took the machine somewhere once); his friend said
               | he did demo it to him and he also told him, over time,
               | how it worked, more or less. I remember him saying all
               | the time that Sloot (and now this guy) talked about
               | infinite compression like it was the most trivial thing
               | in the world so I don 't suppose they actually thought
               | _that_ was any secret.
               | 
               | What I find very strange about the Pieper part (who I
               | also met through a company (client) he advised with that
               | investor vehicle he had of which I don't think any
               | companies made it) is not that he fell for it; unlike
               | what others say, he didn't appear very clever to me, at
               | least not in anything tech, maybe business, although...
               | He seemed like a blaaskaak when I met him; arrogant as
               | hell and not much substance, but maybe that was his spiel
               | for the ceo of the company he invested in. Anyway; what I
               | find strange is not he fell for it but that his Philips
               | tech colleagues, who saw the 'invention' multiple times,
               | didn't have the same feel as you and Krop? And then
               | warned him and said 'you must be insane to believe this
               | boss' , or something. Not like Dutch people would hold
               | back even if he was the boss.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | Jan left a wife and four kids behind and I think Jan was
               | effectively not the engine behind the scam, so I'm not
               | going to put any of the rest of the story online. But if
               | you want we can take this offline, email in profile.
               | 
               | As for Pieper: there is a reason why his investment
               | vehicle (I take it you are referring to Twinning but
               | there were others as well) did not do well.
        
               | anonzzzies wrote:
               | Yes, it was Twinning indeed. Blast from the past that
               | one.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | Gah you really made me go on memory lane there, I've been
               | thinking all day about all those people and what happened
               | to them. Quite a few of them have died, some did really
               | well, some went to jail, some have evaporated into thin
               | air. It's a kaleidoscope.
               | 
               | I've been trying to place the exact date of the demo and
               | I suspect it was one of the first he ever did to
               | 'outsiders'.
        
               | mlok wrote:
               | I am no specialist -- and although I understand and agree
               | with the impossibility being referred to -- somehow it
               | seems to me that AI models are "kind of" getting "closer"
               | to this "golden decompression data file". Although AI
               | models are not that huge, from a tiny human input (the
               | "compressed data") they manage to "decompress" to data of
               | mind-blowing quality, highly detailed and in amazing
               | variety, while staying extremely coherent. These results
               | are "inexact", sure (being exact is the aforementioned
               | impossibility), but to the human perception they seem
               | "perfect", which is good enough (for movies and other
               | arts).
        
               | anonzzzies wrote:
               | Yes, but the Sloot method was supposed to be loss-less.
               | When we talk lossy, it gets trickier because then the
               | definition of the expectation with % of loss and error %
               | should be defined. I am sure we'll have AI's that can
               | produce Terminator-ish in a bit; the thing is, it will be
               | similar to you reminding the movie; it will be similar
               | for the bigger plot, but a lot of details will be
               | completely off/wrong. That's not the type of
               | compression/encoding mr Sloot was talking about.
               | 
               | Edit: encryption was supposed to be encoding/compression.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | > encryption
               | 
               | I think you meant compression?
        
               | anonzzzies wrote:
               | Yeah, I corrected :] They called it Digital Coding
               | System. I don't remember who 'they' was though.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | By your definition the script and a list of actors should
               | be counted as compression, but that's clearly not what
               | this particular invention claimed to do. An AI model is
               | more like a drawing-by-the-numbers game than a
               | compression method. It creates something that looks
               | superficially like the original but isn't the original.
        
               | hnfong wrote:
               | Any "compression" mechanism that apparently violates
               | Shanon's theorems would be "lossy" anyway, and lossy
               | compression is essentially creating something that looks
               | superficially like the original but isn't.
               | 
               | A script and a list of actors would take up 8k already
               | (if not more), so yeah, an AI that can work on the prompt
               | "take this script and make it like a Hollywood
               | blockbuster" might be our best way to attempt to recreate
               | this "compression" system with SoTA tech.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | Sloot claimed his method was lossless, and it supposedly
               | started out from a digital representation (without
               | compression artifacts such as introduced by DCT or FT).
        
             | pizza234 wrote:
             | Interestingly, according to Wikipedia1, Pieper was not a
             | professor of CS, as described in the article; instead, he
             | taught "business administration and corporate governance",
             | which can be compatible with his lack of understanding of
             | the topic (nonetheless, this is a giant gap for somebody
             | with a degree in CS).
             | 
             | 1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roel_Pieper#Career_in_the_N
             | eth...
        
             | asimpletune wrote:
             | The little story about the alien at the beginning was
             | interesting. It might be a way of rephrasing information
             | theory as a limit on "measure-ability".
             | 
             | I remember in high school physics realizing that an in-
             | elastic rod would not be possible, because it would allow
             | faster than light communication. There's probably something
             | to that effect that already exists that I don't know about
             | regarding information theory, and how you can't store more
             | information than is allowed by converting the problem into
             | one of measurement rather than compression.
             | 
             | It might even say something about how small matter is
             | allowed to be.
             | 
             | If you increase the number of sticks the alien is allowed
             | to have, then his task becomes significantly easier. So the
             | question could be rephrased as "what are the fewest sticks
             | the alien could use to complete his task of encoding n bits
             | representing m books".
             | 
             | Fewer sticks than that would violate this law of
             | measurement (I don't know if that actually exists but it
             | seems like it) and more than that is wasteful.
             | 
             | At any rate, for each bit of information you're required to
             | measure with one order of magnitude of precision better, so
             | it's clearly impossible.
        
               | snarkconjecture wrote:
               | You're on the right track, especially with the last
               | sentence.
               | 
               | If reality had an infinite amount of detail (i.e. matter
               | could be arbitrarily small), we could make storage media
               | as dense as we liked by encoding ones and zeros as the
               | presence or absence of tiny bits of matter.
               | 
               | The alien's stick is a version of this, albeit an
               | exponentially inefficient one restricted to codewords of
               | the form 1111...0000.
               | 
               | In practice, if atoms are about N orders of magnitude
               | smaller than macroscopic objects, we can fit (very
               | roughly) 10^N bits of information in an object, and the
               | alien's method can only fit, as you said, roughly N bits.
               | 
               | Of course, existing storage methods are somewhere in
               | between, because 1 gram of storage media can hold way
               | more than 23 bits but way less than 10^23.
               | 
               | (I'm handwaving past some important distinctions, like
               | the distinction between the size of atoms and the level
               | of detail in the physical world. In classical Newtonian
               | physics, things can be made of particles but the
               | particles can have perfectly continuous positions, so
               | that there's still no ultimate limit on measurement
               | detail. Quantum physics changes this -- although this
               | gets complicated because of the holographic principle;
               | many physicists think the ultimate information limit
               | grows like the 2/3 power of volume, instead of
               | linearly...)
        
         | treprinum wrote:
         | Early version of the middle-out compression algorithm?
        
         | pyridines wrote:
         | Oh, that's nothing. I present to you a 1 byte program that
         | outputs the complete works of Shakespeare:
         | 
         | a
         | 
         | The interpreter, written in Rust (for performance), evaluates
         | the command `a` by printing to STDOUT a particular payload
         | included in the runtime.
        
           | ogurechny wrote:
           | Following the steps of pfs, BARF, and other great tools...
        
         | mvdwoord wrote:
         | The book written on this whole saga is a decent read.. not sure
         | if translations are available though.
         | 
         | https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3316995-de-broncode
        
         | busfahrer wrote:
         | Fascinating, this lead me to this list (or should I say rabbit
         | hole?):
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lost_inventions
        
         | GuB-42 wrote:
         | Sloot may not work, but the following compression algorithm has
         | been quite effective for fitting entire movies in a few kB.
         | 
         | - Pick a bunch of demosceners
         | 
         | - Show them a movie
         | 
         | - Lock them down for some time in a room with computers. Works
         | best if the room has a big screen, loud sound system, beer, and
         | some junk food
         | 
         | - Get the resulting executable
        
         | ronsor wrote:
         | This just sounds like ML-based compression. Generate a movie
         | from a n-dimension embedding.
        
       | tombert wrote:
       | I know the tech behind it is pretty different, but this reminds
       | me of .kkrieger from back in the day. An entire 3d FPS,
       | compressed down to 96k. It was pretty neat.
       | 
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.kkrieger
        
         | speps wrote:
         | The backstory written by one of the authors is worth a read:
         | https://fgiesen.wordpress.com/2012/04/08/metaprogramming-for...
        
       | nickstinemates wrote:
       | Razor 1911. Pure nostalgia.
        
         | codezero wrote:
         | Yeah, was stoked to see they're still out there creating great
         | art.
        
         | NKosmatos wrote:
         | A group most known for warez and cracking, for ASCII art in the
         | FILE_ID.DIZ and .nfo files. Brings back many fond memories from
         | some decades ago :-)
        
       | zamadatix wrote:
       | Surprisingly fun, particularly with the care in the little
       | details, for 8kb. Well done!
        
       | Humphrey wrote:
       | Reminds me of the assignment for a 3rd Compouter Science unit. We
       | had to create a short movie using only c++, and then our last
       | lecture of the year was a movie showing of all of them. Most were
       | very similar to this in terms of style and simplicity. It was
       | definitely the longest amount of time I spent on any assingment!
        
         | dmateos wrote:
         | Were you able to use libs like sdl or opengl etc?
        
       | steren wrote:
       | I'm the creator of the original movie this movie took inspiration
       | from (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khWXdkryBE4).
       | 
       | Very impressive to see the remake fit fit in 8kB considering the
       | original is MBs of Blender, SVG and Audio files
       | 
       | Yay, the Creative Common license was actually useful! I wish the
       | authors had actually used the same hedgehog character and audio
       | melody.
        
         | jkingsman wrote:
         | Yay Creative Commons! My heart is warmed any time I see someone
         | sharing their work freely like that.
        
       | RecycledEle wrote:
       | Very cool.
        
       | garganzol wrote:
       | Technically impressive, but the fate of the main movie actor
       | saddens me. (Spoiler: a curious sheep gets smashed by a
       | sledgehammer).
        
         | ant6n wrote:
         | Looks like an anvil to me.
        
       | qwertox wrote:
       | The image of the post is 38.8 KB in size. It's hard to imagine
       | how this animation fits easily 4 times in that image, that is,
       | including the renderer and the sound engine.
        
         | psychoslave wrote:
         | Think about this that way: how much a screenshot of this post
         | would take vs how much it takes in its textually described
         | form?
         | 
         | Yes the demo is still impressive, but the fundamental behind
         | the wonderful work are clear and can be summarized in an
         | approachable explanation as the post admirably do.
        
       | snvzz wrote:
       | 8KB is a demoscene category. Pouet has a nice index[0] of these.
       | 
       | 0. https://www.pouet.net/prodlist.php?type%5B%5D=8k&page=1
        
         | userbinator wrote:
         | And the entry in this article was ranked 2nd place; if you're
         | curious, 1st place is here:
         | https://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=94143
        
           | snvzz wrote:
           | Context: We are talking about Revision 2023[0].
           | 
           | I haven't run the pc prods, but definitely ran the Amiga
           | prods; Always fun.
           | 
           | 0. https://www.pouet.net/party.php?which=1550&when=2023
        
       | Gormo wrote:
       | Unfortunately, the binaries don't run under WINE.
        
         | laurentlb wrote:
         | Thanks for the report, I didn't test with WINE. I suspect it's
         | a problem due to the compression.
         | 
         | I've found an open bug report for WINE related to Crinkler, it
         | might be the same:
         | https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53321
        
       | llacb47 wrote:
       | My laptop's integrated graphics card did not enjoy that.
        
       | gtirloni wrote:
       | After each second the "this is impossible!" thoughts got
       | stronger.
        
       | iandanforth wrote:
       | Poor sheep.
        
       | Civitello wrote:
       | I want to know more about how the irises were done.
        
         | lifthrasiir wrote:
         | Relevant code: https://github.com/ctrl-alt-
         | test/mouton/blob/86b0364/Intro/s...
        
       | jacquesm wrote:
       | That's both hilarious and absolutely amazing. Finally a movie
       | where I couldn't predict the ending :)
        
       | megiddo wrote:
       | Wait until you hear about the demo scene!
        
       | userbinator wrote:
       | After watching a lot of demoscene stuff and reading about how
       | it's done, you start understanding the limits, and things like
       | the sheep (and especially those conical sections for legs) become
       | obvious how they can be expressed as very compact equations and
       | similarly animated. However, it's interesting that AFAIK the
       | majority of these demos rely on the GPU and its powerful 3D
       | acceleration capabilities, but 2D (Japanese)anime-style demos
       | seem to be rare and nonexistent in the smaller sizes. Is 3D
       | animation actually easier?
       | 
       | As a side-note, "mouton" is the French word for "sheep", and thus
       | "mutton".
        
         | lifthrasiir wrote:
         | Given that most 2D animations would still depict events in 3D
         | space, it would be far easier to describe 3D events directly in
         | general.
        
         | throwaway17_17 wrote:
         | I think the way you described it explains the prevalence of 3D
         | for demos. Geometric shapes in 3D can be described in closed
         | form equations requiring a minimum of storage, however, the
         | only 'mathematical' way to store 2D style animation is as SVG
         | curves for outline and then a space filling algorithm for the
         | coloring of those areas. The curves are, I am making a back of
         | the envelope guess, going to require as much storage for a
         | single arc/line as the description of a geometric volume in
         | total. Then there is the issue of storing the animation of
         | those curves which is going to require even more space,
         | compared to the relatively small transformation matrix for the
         | 3D volume. I would also guess the complexity of the rendering
         | algorithm would increase (both in actual algorithmic and space
         | complexity).
         | 
         | -- Caveat: one could argue that storing a series of bitmaps and
         | then playing them back like a flip book could be
         | 'mathematical', especially if some procedural uncompressing
         | algorithm was used to generate full frames from on some change
         | differential, but I don't think that exists and the space
         | requirement would be huge compared to 3D volumetric
         | descriptions.
        
           | nine_k wrote:
           | I don't see why interesting 2D animation could not be made
           | using closed forms. A rectangle takes 2 parameters for shape,
           | and 2 for position; 3 if you rotate it. Similarly for an
           | ellipse. Realistically you also need a Z-index. The soft-min
           | function mentioned in the post would allow to merge 2D shapes
           | the same way as 3D shapes, at the expense of one additional
           | parameter.
           | 
           | An approach similar to the signed depth field and ray
           | marching can be used to determine boundaries, and thus the
           | kind of painting inside. This would require to start a scan
           | line at a position which is guaranteed to be outside of any
           | of the shapes; this must be easy. Texturing would be harder,
           | but, knowing the position inside the shape relative to its
           | center, it would be possible to procedurally generate nice
           | gradients, regular textures like bricks or scales, or noisy
           | textures like fur. Using the same trick with calculating the
           | gradient would allow to create nice thick / styled outlines.
           | 
           | Doing this on a CPU would, of course, be pretty slow, so this
           | would need to be written as a bunch of shaders somehow. I
           | don't see why it won't work though: each shader could take
           | one scanline, they would share the same geometric model, and
           | shaders are good at doing a lot of FPU math in parallel.
        
       | dukeofdoom wrote:
       | Very nice. I'm currently playing around with pygame, and trying
       | to make vfx in it. Trying to mimic a bomb explosion with red
       | particles coming off, and smoke. So curious how these animations
       | are done from scratch with just circle and line primitives.
        
       | bch wrote:
       | 99.9% great for young children
       | 
       | :/
        
       | wiether wrote:
       | > P.S. For comparison, the text of this article contains around
       | 21,000 characters, so it would take 21kB.
       | 
       | That's exactly what I was thinking about while reading the
       | article!
        
       | Sparkyte wrote:
       | That was incredible! Reminds me of that fully 3d game in 96kb.
        
       | jbverschoor wrote:
       | The youtube is 16.1MB for comparison (1920x1080), so a rate of
       | 2000
        
       | mrfinn wrote:
       | There's a whole genre in demoscene dedicated to 4kb productions.
       | Most popular example till the current date is Elevated
       | (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGdUDGo2Gxw), which in an
       | entirely different way, provides also an incredibly good
       | cinematic feeling. Made by wizards it must be.
        
       | verisimi wrote:
       | I was expecting some sort of ultra high definition film - 4k, to
       | the power of 4! But it actually refers to an incredibly small
       | video size (8kilobytes)
        
         | laurentlb wrote:
         | The nice thing with the procedural approach is that we could
         | render the video in any definition.
        
           | verisimi wrote:
           | Yes - its a truly impressive thing - a world I knew nothing
           | about.
        
       | Agingcoder wrote:
       | In my time that was called ' I wrote a 4k intro'
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-01-25 23:02 UTC)