Freax vol. 1. - Feedback
category: residue [glöplog]
After all of this feedback, I'm *so* going to wait for a second edition :)
Perhaps the biggest mistake in regard of the spelling mistakes wasn't precisely to put the translation in the hands of one guy with a phd, but not letting multiple people proofread and check the translation. Even really smart people make mistakes, more eyeballs yield better results etc. etc.
It might be interesting to buy a first edition in the end for being a (toungue in cheek) misprint ;)
Perhaps the biggest mistake in regard of the spelling mistakes wasn't precisely to put the translation in the hands of one guy with a phd, but not letting multiple people proofread and check the translation. Even really smart people make mistakes, more eyeballs yield better results etc. etc.
It might be interesting to buy a first edition in the end for being a (toungue in cheek) misprint ;)
Since this topic is active I might as well correct a few mistakes I remember off the top of my head - the full list is as home and I'm bored at work :)
First, there's the preposterous claim that Budbrain Productions was a subgroup of Flash Production. Disproving this one wouldn't even be an issue as I personally have never EVER seen anything suggesting such a thing. But since I'd get flamed for not presenting any proof, I went straight to Psycho (the coder of their megademos as some might recall). Here's a direct quote from his email: "To clarify, we had NO involvement with any other groups, least of all Flash
Productions." Case closed.
Then there's the bit about Fairlight's birth which really bothered me from the start, as the correct info is widely known and easily available. "Black Shadow formed the group in 1987 and Strider joined in 1988". Ok, I _really_ hope you're not using Scenery as your reference material. :) As they both have said in interviews (see In Medias Res for example) they founded the group together in easter 1987. The first FLT release I'm aware of (I'm sure earlier ones exist) is "Grand Prix", released 1987-04-20 by Strider, still known as No1 at the time. Pretty good for someone who joined a year later. On a related note, the bit about Strider being "one of the most mysterious figures" on the scene was somewhat interesting. He gave out interviews, put his photo in FLT release(s) and, judging by old reports, was a very prominent figure at copy parties. If anything, I'd say he was one of the LEAST mysterious crackers out there. But this one is a matter of opinion of course. :)
Some might whine that these are just tiny details. Perhaps, but since you're printing them down you might as well have the facts straight.
More to come as I check out my list, and find time to actually finish reading the book..
First, there's the preposterous claim that Budbrain Productions was a subgroup of Flash Production. Disproving this one wouldn't even be an issue as I personally have never EVER seen anything suggesting such a thing. But since I'd get flamed for not presenting any proof, I went straight to Psycho (the coder of their megademos as some might recall). Here's a direct quote from his email: "To clarify, we had NO involvement with any other groups, least of all Flash
Productions." Case closed.
Then there's the bit about Fairlight's birth which really bothered me from the start, as the correct info is widely known and easily available. "Black Shadow formed the group in 1987 and Strider joined in 1988". Ok, I _really_ hope you're not using Scenery as your reference material. :) As they both have said in interviews (see In Medias Res for example) they founded the group together in easter 1987. The first FLT release I'm aware of (I'm sure earlier ones exist) is "Grand Prix", released 1987-04-20 by Strider, still known as No1 at the time. Pretty good for someone who joined a year later. On a related note, the bit about Strider being "one of the most mysterious figures" on the scene was somewhat interesting. He gave out interviews, put his photo in FLT release(s) and, judging by old reports, was a very prominent figure at copy parties. If anything, I'd say he was one of the LEAST mysterious crackers out there. But this one is a matter of opinion of course. :)
Some might whine that these are just tiny details. Perhaps, but since you're printing them down you might as well have the facts straight.
More to come as I check out my list, and find time to actually finish reading the book..
This Budbrain thing is interesting. I now don't remember the source, but I can assure you I never wrote anything without confirmation. I will try to find where have I found it, but of course what Psycho says, should be accepted.
For Fairlight, I think I wrote this about the Amiga section of FLT. And the fact that Strider gave a lot of interviews don't necessarily clear up his image. Just as Celebrandil said, he was not the easiest guy around, and although you could know who is him and what is he doing on the scene, one could hardly know anything about his background.
For Fairlight, I think I wrote this about the Amiga section of FLT. And the fact that Strider gave a lot of interviews don't necessarily clear up his image. Just as Celebrandil said, he was not the easiest guy around, and although you could know who is him and what is he doing on the scene, one could hardly know anything about his background.
Ok, if you meant their activities on Amiga it would be a different thing. I could've just misunderstood that part.
btw. just give you hint about megahawks: look at releasedates of megahawks demos: do they seem to be oldschool: http://www.pouet.net/groups.php?which=1493
and some assembly results may give you hint who dr.vector is for real =D
and some assembly results may give you hint who dr.vector is for real =D
Could you be a bit more specific?
I heard Camelot is called a Swedish group in this book... So it definitely suxx0rs.
Camelot does not suxx0r.
god damn break you sound like the guy in simpsons who sells comics :D
no offence.
no offence.
Dr.Vectors identity is no secret, http://noname.c64.org/csdb/scener/?id=1309
uns3en, the release dates at pouet are just the dates of _re-releasing_ the old productions.
Chavez: I couldn't really care less, as long as I don't sound like people who just let mistakes and questionable things slide by saying "who cares about details, it's a good book anyway". No offence.
Heh, yeah, and Hujowa is not a fakegroup either...
We all know Dr. Vector is Guillermo Blanco, whose great 80's-styled and -made electronic disco anthems deserve a place in the book. Period.
HEHEHEHE. IF YOU HAVE DR. VECTOR IN BOOK ALSO REMEMBER TO MENTION PERUVIAN DEMOGROUP CALLED "ASSTEROID" THEY HAVE CRACKED ALOT OF PERUVIAN WAREZ. AND ALSO REMEMBER TO MENTION CHINESE DEMOGROUP "HONG KONG DRAGON" THEY WERE ACTIVE BACK IN 1980'S BUT THEY VANISHED WIHTOUT TRACE :((((((((((((((((((((((((((((88
this thing is so funney. just like if history book mention great dictators i could sneak for example fake name there. hehehe THAT WOULD BE COOL. yea.... cooooool
Hong Kong Dragon are still quite active, afaik. Loting/HKD is online every once in a while and Dubazi/HKD lives in Germany now, i'll keep you updated.
Also don't forget, once i actually go a demo from an Eithopean group (Apparently) (The Real African Force!)
http://www.scene.org/file.php?file=/mirrors/the_scene_archives/The_Scene_Archives_Vol_08/Disks_are_in_Here/Disks_7351_To_7400/7368-Dream_in_The_Desert.DMS&fileinfo
The Scrolltext is a hoot !!
I really liked the book, and good to see that you didn't leave out Australia :) .
http://www.scene.org/file.php?file=/mirrors/the_scene_archives/The_Scene_Archives_Vol_08/Disks_are_in_Here/Disks_7351_To_7400/7368-Dream_in_The_Desert.DMS&fileinfo
The Scrolltext is a hoot !!
I really liked the book, and good to see that you didn't leave out Australia :) .
ok uns3en, we get the point, you're onto something.
I am bringing up this topic again, as many of you have purchased Freax at Breakpoint, and might be able to add some notes and corrections for the second edition.
Here I paste one I received by mail, just because I am collecting these here.
41: In line 10, after "Ä", there is an undefined symbol, possibly a font or character set problem
98: "Gale" Wellington's first name should be "Gail"
117: Missing "r" in Mental Hangove[r]
Several pages, including index and hard cover: "millenium" should be "millennium" (sorry, I couldn't resist: http://www.cloanto.com/users/mcb/19990101y2k.html :-)
Here I paste one I received by mail, just because I am collecting these here.
41: In line 10, after "Ä", there is an undefined symbol, possibly a font or character set problem
98: "Gale" Wellington's first name should be "Gail"
117: Missing "r" in Mental Hangove[r]
Several pages, including index and hard cover: "millenium" should be "millennium" (sorry, I couldn't resist: http://www.cloanto.com/users/mcb/19990101y2k.html :-)
I love the content, but I'm not too found of the presentation. The english is really bad at places, and statements are sometimes presented without any background/source. This is something every historian would bash you for doing, so a rewrite of some sentences/paragraphs would be nice.
After reading the book, I have to agree with the people above, especially what vamecum said about sources/references . The book itself is great, but all the grammar errors and weird sentences ruins certain aspects of it for me (and apparently also for others). I guess the translator is to blame for these things though, but still, they are very annoying.
One thing I really, really miss, is references. It's basically a good idea to reference your sources when handing out fact statements in a fact/history book. I actually think this is the first non-fictional book I've ever read without an appendix listing all the sources used to compile the book.
For instance, on page 41:
“[...]As a matter of fact, Bill Gates himself admitted that he needed a psychiatric therapy during his teens. Even nowadays he is a typical nerd, who knows a lot about computers, but nothing about life.[...]”
I would really like to know where this is coming from because to me, it just looks like an assumption, and assumptions are not facts nor history. ;)
Other than that, as I said, the book is great, and I'm looking forward to the next volumes.
One thing I really, really miss, is references. It's basically a good idea to reference your sources when handing out fact statements in a fact/history book. I actually think this is the first non-fictional book I've ever read without an appendix listing all the sources used to compile the book.
For instance, on page 41:
“[...]As a matter of fact, Bill Gates himself admitted that he needed a psychiatric therapy during his teens. Even nowadays he is a typical nerd, who knows a lot about computers, but nothing about life.[...]”
I would really like to know where this is coming from because to me, it just looks like an assumption, and assumptions are not facts nor history. ;)
Other than that, as I said, the book is great, and I'm looking forward to the next volumes.
The references would make a separate book, full of Internet links that are dead since ages.
well, tomcat, you don't need to refrence everything, but some statements could really demand a source or a small comment on where the info is coming from.
The bill gates example could be changed from
"Even nowadays he is a typical nerd, who knows a lot about computers, but nothing about life."
to something like;
"Even today he is regarded by many as a typical nerd, who knows a lot about computers, but nothing about life."
this way, you are not the one delevering the statements, but rather it's the anonymous "many". A cheap technique to cover lack of sources, but it may work. the book need not to be covered with refrences, but some of them here and there, and maybe an appendix with some of the big sources, would be nice.
But as I said, the content of the book is interesting, it's just the presentation that sometimes is a bit strange. :)
The bill gates example could be changed from
"Even nowadays he is a typical nerd, who knows a lot about computers, but nothing about life."
to something like;
"Even today he is regarded by many as a typical nerd, who knows a lot about computers, but nothing about life."
this way, you are not the one delevering the statements, but rather it's the anonymous "many". A cheap technique to cover lack of sources, but it may work. the book need not to be covered with refrences, but some of them here and there, and maybe an appendix with some of the big sources, would be nice.
But as I said, the content of the book is interesting, it's just the presentation that sometimes is a bit strange. :)
Weasel words never work.
