<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Friday games</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.starchamber.com/2006/12/friday-games.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.starchamber.com/2006/12/friday-games.html</link>
	<description>Ned Gulley's Blog. Resident buzzwords: synthetic biology, ambient displays, swarm robotics, wise crowds.</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 12:24:48 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: JMike</title>
		<link>http://www.starchamber.com/2006/12/friday-games.html#comment-1110</link>
		<dc:creator>JMike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2006 20:04:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.starchamber.com/2006/12/friday-games.html#comment-1110</guid>
		<description>OK, I got up to 34330 on the Impossible level.
This is one of those annoying games where you score higher by starting at a lower level -- I started at Hard and got 87860 points.  I am guessing that the super high scores on the list, if done by unaided humans, were from the easy start.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, I got up to 34330 on the Impossible level.<br />
This is one of those annoying games where you score higher by starting at a lower level &#8212; I started at Hard and got 87860 points.  I am guessing that the super high scores on the list, if done by unaided humans, were from the easy start.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JMike</title>
		<link>http://www.starchamber.com/2006/12/friday-games.html#comment-1108</link>
		<dc:creator>JMike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2006 17:03:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.starchamber.com/2006/12/friday-games.html#comment-1108</guid>
		<description>Took my first crack at Word Shoot.  Tried the medium level just to get the hang of the interface and then I had a go at the impossible level:

Word score: 28100
Correct: 153
Missed: 12
Correct rate: 92%

Final score: 29020

I think I can do a little better but probably not a super lot better.  I was banging away on the keyboard loudly enough to attract attention in the office.  It's a little distracting to have to hit the 'Enter' key after every word, since the words are so short.

I think my raw typing speed has gone down since my early 20s, but only a bit.  I was in a contest in 1991 where I did a five-minute stretch at 134 words per minute and I think I can still hit 130+ for shorter periods.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Took my first crack at Word Shoot.  Tried the medium level just to get the hang of the interface and then I had a go at the impossible level:</p>
<p>Word score: 28100<br />
Correct: 153<br />
Missed: 12<br />
Correct rate: 92%</p>
<p>Final score: 29020</p>
<p>I think I can do a little better but probably not a super lot better.  I was banging away on the keyboard loudly enough to attract attention in the office.  It&#8217;s a little distracting to have to hit the &#8216;Enter&#8217; key after every word, since the words are so short.</p>
<p>I think my raw typing speed has gone down since my early 20s, but only a bit.  I was in a contest in 1991 where I did a five-minute stretch at 134 words per minute and I think I can still hit 130+ for shorter periods.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: michael addicott</title>
		<link>http://www.starchamber.com/2006/12/friday-games.html#comment-1071</link>
		<dc:creator>michael addicott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2006 06:46:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.starchamber.com/2006/12/friday-games.html#comment-1071</guid>
		<description>thanks for the words. weird and chaotic better than somnolent and boring, i hope. but, we believe in continuous improvement...i noticed the url in the analytics and had to see starchamber.com. re: stanford, there have been a few published studies and several colloquia recently using the game software (note: not all of the games, the rest fit an editorial theme)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thanks for the words. weird and chaotic better than somnolent and boring, i hope. but, we believe in continuous improvement&#8230;i noticed the url in the analytics and had to see starchamber.com. re: stanford, there have been a few published studies and several colloquia recently using the game software (note: not all of the games, the rest fit an editorial theme)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
