Not dead yet

Fri, 01/17/2014 - 19:03 -- BlueWinds

Three things in this post: A small release, then a long bit of Javascript Geekery, then a bit more baring my soul to the world. One picture for each.


So, I'm not dead yet. Here's a very small update to prove it. It contains only a single additional scene with Wend.

It does however have about 7 new or updated images, mostly for Wend and Hilde.

Also a couple of spelling corrections. Nothing terribly exciting.


Javascript generators are awesome. Like, 100% pure awesome. I <3 yield.

They've existed in Python just about forever, but Python doesn't really need them the way Javascript does. Python isn't designed for an asynchronous, event based programming style the way JS is.

To grasp why they're so important in JS, consider this block of code:

asyncIncrement = function (_id, increment, done) {

  db.get(_id, function(err, object) {

    if (err) return done(err);

    object.used += increment;, done);



It's fairly standard. Load an object from the database, add something to a field, save it again. It's done in node.js style, passing around callbacks. Promises are... icky, for reasons I won't get into here.

Now look at this code instead:

asyncIncrement = co(function* (_id, increment) {

  object = yield db.get(_id);

  object.used += increment;



(minor note - db is called in a slightly different way here, so the two pieces of code aren't exactly identical)

The second one is two lines shorter, but more importantly, it's conceptually simpler. "yield" can be directly translated as "wait for this this, then carry on". It's fully asynchronous, non-blocking, and yet linear to look at.

It also makes error handling easier. Any errors called by the database propagate straight up the chain into our asyncIncrement function, and since we don't handle them, out into the caller. You can use "try {} catch {}" as it was intended, instead of constantly "if (err) return done(err);"ing all over the place. Yay, helpful stack traces and reduced boilerplate code!

It's just a super-win for everyone involved. Generators (used in this way - they have other uses too) are even a performance boost compared to Promises, and roughly on-par with node-style callbacks. They'll get faster soon.

Sadly, they can only be used in Firefox 27+ by default. Chrome supports them behind a flag, and Node.js with a command line argument.

I am be super-excited to use Koa in my next web project. Now if only CoffeeScript would support them already, and stop bikeshedding over what's the "prettiest syntax".


I am, at the moment, exceedingly confused.

I'm only interested in women. I know that, and I've known that for as long as I've been interested in anyone.

Beyond that... confusion.

I find almost all of my fantasies involve BD, often with a taste of SM. However, I'm never involved. I have never really been able to imagine myself having sex or sex-related activities. Whenever I'm imagining a scene and I try to step into one of the roles it kills the magic. I'm neither the one tying up nor the one being tied up, neither fondling nor being fondled.

And more than that, I tend to have very negative reactions whenever anyone attempts to assert authority over me in real life. My boss has learned that he cannot give me orders. He can ask or convince, but firmer demands just meet firmer refusal. No one has found a limit to that yet. My father once had to disassemble a lock and literally drag me out of my room, because to amount of parental authority could convince me to get in the car for an event I did not want to go to.

Despite the fact that I fantasize about other people under domination and bondage, I get angry if anyone even looks like they might be attempting to place me within their power, physically, socially or otherwise. It damages our relationship in a long-term way.

Nor am I a shy domme in hiding. That's pretty much the only other thing I'm sure of, other than not being interested in men. I don't want power over anyone else. The idea is icky.

So... confused. The image seems appropriate.


benryher (not verified) on

Regarding the last part: same here, except I'm a straight male, and I'm not really into SM at all (although I'm willing to go along with a partner's M if they really, really are into it)

What you can do is start simple and not force yourself to think about things in terms of BDSM at all if that's not what comes naturally for you. For example, just focus on eating someone out, fingering them in different ways, using water on them, etc. and experimenting in trying to figure out what works for them, then buy toys and such to use on them that you think they'd like, and presto changeo you're tying them up and basically domming without having to force a mindset on yourself.

BlueWinds on

That was really more the point - I'm not into any of that stuff either, not even just kissing or naked touching. Imagining Wend doing (or having done) any of that is nice. Imagining her doing any of that to me (or me doing it to her) is a lady-boner-killer.

Hehe. Lady-boner. Boner-lady. Lady-lady. Boner-boner. Londy-Bader. Laner-Body. Loner-Bady.

benryher (not verified) on

I'm not into kissing at all really (except to the extent the other person enjoys it, I guess), either, and I never had fantasies about naked touching or eating pussy (involving me) until after I did it, so I wouldn't worry about it. I feel fairly confident, though, that were you to just find someone who was willing to let you eat them out and you did it that you would enjoy it. Really, just think of it like any other game, you have some controls and you're trying to figure out what does what and how to use them to get to the goal haha. After you find the fun in it for what it is as a task, you'll probably also start to find the sexuality in being involved in it as well (sexuality works with "jump starts" like that in general, after all... most women and straight men who do enjoy receiving anal sex probably never had a fantasy about it being done to them personally before they just decided to try it, for example)

EDrake7 on

Got this bug report when trying to open the game with latest update. :P

About your confused state, I can only say don't let it bother you. It's part of the human nature, to seek who you are. What you are. I can say from experience: although I'm barely 20-years-old, my intrests, fantasies, opinions... They change irregularly regularly. I bet even on your 50s, you'd still think you know who you are and what you want. But no.

Like I said, even if it confuses you, don't let it bother too much. That just makes you like the rest of us. ^^

BlueWinds on

Oops, I should have made that error on the screen, rather than in a bug report. It says "This save is too old to be loaded." Click on Load, then delete the offending save and the error will stop popping up.

I don't let it bother me very often. I've just been in a self-reflective mood recently, thinking about life, myself, the world, etc. Mostly comes from reading the Dune series again, I think. Those books are very deep. Reading them the first time changed my life. This second time isn't quite so radical of an effect, but they're still thought provoking and insightful.

Wizard on

I've sorted of been the same way Blu. I mean, in my fantasies, I'm always the one in control and I prefer watching rather than participating in the act. That said, in real life I'm extremely timid and that sort of thing doesn't reflect my behaviour at all. I guess it's just one of those dualism things, huh.

crazy_alan1988 (not verified) on

Not being one or the other at all when it comes to my fantasies, it is hard to say, but regardless, I think if you do not put yourself in either position in your fantasies, it isn't your fetish. Sure you may enjoy watching some of these things, or reading or seeing some fantasies, but it is not what you want to involve yourself in. I can only say that you would have to see how these fantasies and fetishes evolve in your eyes when you actively involve yourself with someone, sexually, if you haven't already. Just try different things, and don't let your fantasies confuse you, they maybe as fleeting as random thoughts.

Anonymous (not verified) on

There's nothing to be confused about here.

You like to fantasize about these kind of things. It does not mean that you're into this yourself, but that they make you curious and/or excited, and for that, you like it. It's like... look, I can enjoys watching a video about bondage or SM, but that doesn't mean I would like if it were to happen to myself; I hate the idea of anyone trying to tell me what and how to do something, just as much as I hate the idea of doing that to someone else. That is absolutely normal.

After all (getting a little heavy here, so apologies if I offend anyone), there are people who can enjoy rape things, but are absolutely disguted by the act itself. You yourself made rape events in-game, and that doens't mean that you go around cornering girls or wishes you could have countless tentacles to molest them, just as I'm sure that the people who liked those events do the same.

There is a large wall between fantasy and reality, Winds. Between what you like in fiction and in facto, in reality. There's nothing surprising or confusing in this kind of thing; it's only natural. You are, more probably than not, a lot more chaste* than you think of.

*Chaste is not the exact word I was searching for here, but it's the best I have. You get the message, don't you?

1) Oh, the irony of giving sexual commentary/advice to a woman on the other side of the planet, when I'm probably younger and less experienced in that area than you. The internet is lovely, ain't it?
2) Can I call you Winds? No slap to the cheek, punch to the stomach, kick to the face?

BlueWinds on

2) You can call me Winds, but I prefer just Blue. No kicking involved either way.

1) I doubt you're that much less experienced, since there isn't much further down that ladder to go. ;) I've kissed two people in my life - one of them once, the other twice. That's the sum extent of my personal experience. Neither I nor they were particularly "into" it.

0) I do get what you're going for with chaste. I self-identified as Asexual for several years, and to some extent I still do. See, it's not just that I imagine different things than I'd actually like to experience IRL - it's more that I imagine other people having sex ond never myself.

Anonymous (not verified) on

2) Okey dokey ma'am

1) Hey, the most advanced contact with a woman was hugging them. Consider yourself way above me on what goes for personal experience.

0) Again, there is nothing wrong with this. I don't really imagine myself having sex at all; it's simply not part of my fantasies.

That said, I'm gonna give you a suggestion. Why don't you try creating an alter-ego of yours? Maybe a character or something like that that you create in your mind, someone with a personality very similar to yours, but that is, in the end, a different person? That may be more effective for you. Or not. I don't know. But it is worth a try, isn't it?

And if it helps, I think most people don't imagine themselves having sex with another person, but two different people having sex or simply someone attractive being... kinky or something like that.

And, now that I think about it... I think imagining myself having sex with a random woman would be pretty narcisist of me. Don't know why, never thought about that before. Hm, strange. And you? What do you think?

Jyeti on  This seems like an interesting link about attraction, fantasies, and other thoughts in relation to asexuality.  One study said 1 in 100 people are asexual; so, it isn't rare in this world of billions.  I honestly don't know if I'd fit in or not.  I really don't care about sex for pleasure, but I do like the idea of the sweet romantic to sensual parts beforehand that would constitute foreplay if sex of some sort later transpired.  Of course, fantasies are another matter altogether.....  To me, if you get pleasure from running together or fantasizing about others instead of kissing or love making yourself, more power to you.  Everybody has their differences.  Hope you all enjoy them. : )

BlueWinds on

That is interesting, thanks.

The main question for me is not how I identify myself, but how I explain myself to others. In that regard, asexual has not been helpful - it leads to way too many prying questions, and more untrue assumptions than clarifying ones. So, yes, I've never experienced sexual attraction to another person, but if I say "Ace", then people also assume a lack of fantasy, arousal, disapproval for sex, etc. That is, it muddies the water more than it clarifies.

It's become easier for me to just say "lesbian, but not looking for sex right now" than "asexual, but all your assumptions about what that means are wrong." That's just my specific situation, of course. Anyone else is free to take or leave whatever identities and descriptors they find helpful or comforting.

Jyeti on

Ah, I see what you mean.  Too many assumptions about the word out there.  Unfair connotations.  Well, I guess your way works as well as any is going to for a brief explanation.  I know it also makes for less questions than, "Lesbian, but never interested in physical intimacy.  If you want to excite my mind though, you could write some kinky lesbian stories with realistic and interesting characters."  Or something like that.

Zaphyel on

(Maybe my english isn´t good enough to paint the picture but i try ^^ greetings from austria/vienna) I always saw it that way: Fantasies are support for reality, not a replacement. Fantasies aren´t supposed to get real. For example, alot of people are into furry, lolicon or other fetishes, but most of  them would never think of really have sex that way, they only enjoy the fantasy because reality is not able to match the fantasies and on the other side, fantasies are not able to match reality . Personally i use my fantasies having sex with someone, they enter my mind flowing through and fade away, it gives me the opportunity to concentrate on my partners wishes and get my satisfaction from the fantasies, of course there are alot of things i prefer to happen in reality but i am way more flexible because i don´t need a special fetish to be in the world outside my mind. Maybe my fantasies are more advanced because my RL-life is boring and will stay boring (because i am a very boring person in RL) but it doesn´t really matter as long i am able to use the support of my fantasies. Be what you are in RL and be what you want in your mind, its quite normal that these two go very different ways.

BlueWinds on

The difference here is that I don't want anything in real life. It's not "I don't want to act out my fantasies", it's more "none of my fantasies involve me at all." Does that make sense? I never imagine myself doing anything - it's always other people.

Zaphyel on

It make sense.

In that case u are a perfectly normal voyeur. Watching is more important than acting, can get a bit complicated in a partnership but not that big of a deal. Only danger would be if you really need to watch people having sex, without them knowing (in RL), that can make your life hard.

If you want to know how psychologists see that characteristic: In ICD ( International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems) 10 - will this year replaced with ICD 11 - voyerism count only as a desease if you have big problems living with it and acting illegal (like secretly watching people) otherwise its maybe uncommon but not rare and not really a dysfunction.


Most of my life i had the feeling i would miss something because i do not act like "normal" or better said "the most" people but after a got older i realised, even if i try very hard to act like most people most of the time i didn´t enjoy it, it wasn´t me and it didn´t work out for me.

Dasanko on

Well, yield can still prove itself useful in Python... for example:

def my_generator():
    stuff = [1, 2, 3]
    for x in stuff:
        yield x * x
generator = my_generator()
for x in generator:

...although, when used in a class, it gets a little bitchy.

"I'm neither the one tied up nor the one being tied up"
So, you're the one tying up?
Nitpicking apart, as others have stated before, just sounds like common fantasizing. For most people, fantasies are best kept that way.

EDIT: Formatting this was a nightmare.

BlueWinds on

Sorry about the formatting. For the life of me, I cannot figure out how to get the WYSIWYG editor I use to display for other users. Grrrr, Drupal, stuff like this is why I stopped using you for serious work a year ago.

It's true that generators are useful in Python - they're just not drastically paradigm changing the way they are for JS.

Nitpick edited. :P

Espera on

It sounds to me like you're an Equal with voyeuristic tendencies. I don't see anything wrong with that.

Skelter on

I've read somewhere that fantasies, especially in terms of dominance/submission, can mirror a person's life-attitude - hence the stereotype of the highly successful businessman (always assertive, in control, ambitious) hiring a dominatrix. That businessman doesn't want to be dominated in his work-life - in fact, he probably spends his work life dominating others. He doesn't even necessarily want to be genuinely dominated in his sex-life (though of course, he might) - a lot of subs maintain their sense of genuine control whilst nominally surrendering. I'm sure a psychilogist could wax philosophical on the subject, but the point is the 'why' doesn't actually matter. 

Similarly, enjoying voyeuristic fantasies whilst never having any in which you're an active participant isn't a problem in itself either. The western world is, at the moment, very keen on pushing the idea that more sex is better, everyone should have lots of sex for optimal happiness - but if you sleep around, you're a slut and shame on you. There's mixed up and messed up messages coming from everywhere, so it's best to just not listen.If you honestly feel like being exclusively a voyeur is detrimental to your life, ask yourself why. If it's because you think it's not how you Should be, examine why you think you ought to be something else. It can be a difficult message to internalise, but it's an important one. 

If you can find a genuine reason that it is detrimental (for instance, if in the future you find yourself unable to connect in a sexual relationship when you really want to), I'd recommend going to see a psychologist that specialises in sex. The confusion is honestly pretty ubiquitous as a result of those aformentioned messages, and when it comes to sex, I think a lot of people (myself included) could probably have benefited from some guidance at some point in our lives. There's a good reason they say a woman's sexual prime is in her 30's (and for men, it's still later than you might think)!

Hope that makes you feel better :-)

AColonyOfAnts on

Typo: (Uptown -> Encounter with Wend, 2nd screen)

You lift her lift her up by the waist and bury your face in her breasts, breathing in her smell as you carry her over to the bed.

I had to jump back to the guild event save, my other saves weren't working. =P

Bug: (or at least I think it's one)

Uptown -> Encounter with Wend is repeatable and consistently highlighted in blue. (totally abused it to max vag sex ^^)

Typo: (Study -> with someone 50+ int) Comma misplaced, must've skipped over that one.

Alison has expressed an interest in history, and, never one to discourage curiosity (especially when it might have practical benefits), you've scheduled a trip to the library.

Still no sub training event for high dom characters.

BlueWinds on

Yep, not supposed to be infinitely repeatable.

Whoops! The "no sub training" is embarrassingly persistent. Will be fixed in the next version. I wrote the scene several months ago, but it's been inaccessible to female characters (only a male PC could trigger it).

AColonyOfAnts on

Didn't catch this one on the dump (I'd make a terrible editor), but rather when I was playing:


She can't help but watch as he slides into the bath - his cock is massive, even flacid flaccid, and he winks as he catches her watching.

Also, customer Janosz description text still is cut halfway, attached is save file.

BlueWinds on

What, you didn't stare intensely at the word flaccid? You weren't riveted to the screen by my adjectival description of one man's massive cock?

Son, I am disappoint.


To be fair, I saw some typos in my copy of Dune. The 25th anniversary edition of one of the best-selling books of all time, so missing some things and catching them later is no indication that you're a bad editor. :P


AColonyOfAnts on

I blame my raging disinterest in cocks.