[X3D-Ecosystem] What John doesn’t want to do, wants to do, and is guided to do

Mon Jan 20 23:54:32 PST 2025

AI is rapidly being able to use Blender to do 3D work.  It is rapidly
becoming obvious that I should study a Blender glossary, to enable me to
use Blender effectively.  Meanwhile, there are only hard paths before me.

That’s my problem, I don’t *want* to use Blender until I can type in an
equation and get back a surface.  I believe I could design with geometry
nodes which would suffice.  Then I will learn sufficient materials to
achieve the look I want.  But then, I would like to export shaders from
Blender. On top of that, I want to modify equations interactively.

Blender+Mathematica+X3D would be awesome.

I have been doing what people want.  Because I don’t know what I want to do.

JSONverse was the culmination of what I wanted to do as far as multiuser
math education, except for realtime raytracing of surfaces, not triangles.

I have wanted to easily teach people and computers how to play multiplayer
card games (I love Milles Bornes) but I’ve not tried that with prompts
yet.  Writing games with prompts (on the level of the Extensible Graphical
Game Generator by Jon Orwant) has been a goal.  Another goal is recombinant
games, having a computer discover games through recombination (ala Cameron
Browne’s Ludemes and class grammars
http://cambolbro.com).   AFAIK, LLMs can’t discover how to test
recombinations of games for playability yet.

So goals:  Make multiplayer games easy to learn, play, discover, test and
build.

In other words, Unreal and Unity are like nightmares of complexity to me.
What’s wrong with a simple set of natural language instructions, or if you
need a thick manual, make a discoverable database of rules, not a bunch of
heavy coding.  If only we could mix X3D with Prolog.

Perhaps you would like my paper from 1986?
http://www.coderextreme.net/TurnTaking.html  Orwant took this to the next
level.

Ideally, we could teach math as explorations  instead of grueling ways it
was taught in the 70s and 80s.  I need to explore more online tools like
Brilliant.

As far as rules, I think about 3 dimensional specification languages,
 realizing most people want natural languages.  I have aphantasia, so my
internal imagination and visualization is near nil.  How can we teach X3D4
with 3D?

If I had a way to build diagrams from belief systems, that would be cool.

So primarily,  I’m into making complex things understandable through
non-natural language means, possibly through demonstration or example.

If you can see a kernel of a goal in this, great.

My spirit also aches for deafblind people who want to communicate on the
internet through protactile.

John

On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 12:32 AM Michalis Kamburelis <
michalis.kambi at gmail.com> wrote:

> John,
>
> My point was to suggest to you a better way, that will allow you to
> achieve what you want *easier*, not *harder*.
>
> Your comparisons indicate that you find my suggestions (read the docs,
> start with simple code snippets, use Blender as a regular user) harder, but
> I still argue that your approach in this thread ("ask AI for a larger
> solution and then wonder how/why the AI answer is wrong") is harder than
> what I suggest.
>
> You don't need to run the marathon, read academic documents or do other
> things perceived as "hard" that you mentioned.
>
> To recap / reformulate my 3 suggestions:
>
> - Trust Blender Python API docs (more than what AI tells you). You are
> reading things, you are obviously reading emails and you're reading the AI
> output, so I hope you will not have trouble reading the Blender Python API
> docs. You naturally don't need to read it "from beginning to end" like a
> book, just consult it as necessary. When you wonder about using X, look up
> what X does, follow links from X to other classes and related methods --
> Blender Python API docs are heavily inter-linked for this reason.
>
> - Try simplest code snippets in Blender. You mentioned yourself you like
> code snippets, this aligns with my suggestion. Try to do simple things, 1
> line, few lines, see if it does what you think, then build a bigger program
> from these blocks. This *will* achieve a better outcome than asking AI to
> come up with a bigger solution.
>
> - Do use Blender as a "regular user" and see in Blender's Python console
> what your (interactive) actions translate to in Python. It's really easy.
> You learn Python API this way. And you will then know what your users
> (which are Blender users in this case) actually do.
>
> Regards,
> Michalis
>
> pon., 20 sty 2025 o 22:11 John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com> napisał(a):
>
>> I’m not really sure what you’re saying Michalis.  I’ve got working gramps
>> export code, so it would seem the task is to do the opposite using similar
>> API on  import.  I can stare at the API for ages.  I found PivotConstraint
>> by looking at the API based on what Joe told me, not anything an AI told
>> me,  the AI was wrong.  There was no PivotConstraint in export or import so
>> we were on new ground.
>>
>> No, I can’t consume large amounts of documents on the web, I mostly rely
>> on code snippets.  If I could read academic documents, I could probably
>> have gotten a PhD or Masters.  Back when I could read better, my professors
>> invited me to get a higher degree.
>>
>> Please be considerate and realize there’s neurodiversity in what people
>> can accomplish.  Just because I can master the bash shell doesn’t mean I
>> can use the Blender GUI or play a 3D game to my satisfaction.  I do win
>> world records regularly on Solitaire4us on Roku. I don’t expect people to
>> learn vim.  I recommend notepad or vs code.  I did find this thing called
>> vim3d which is very intriguing.  I did try a “Blender” introductory game,
>> but it was very short.
>>
>> Do I expect you to run a marathon or be a concert violinist?
>>
>> What I probably should do is grab the Blender source code so i can use
>> bash tools to learn it.  Weird why we didn’t figure that out a long time
>> ago.  That’s how I got as far as I did with CGE.  I did look at Blender RNA
>> a bit.
>>
>> UTSL!
>>
>> Ps:
>>
>> I recently found “grep -L”, should be really useful!  I’ve been wanting
>> that for quite a while!
>>
>> I have found AI useful for creating a prototype Python database filtering
>> GUI, fun stuff and no coding needed except to load the database from X3D
>> JSON.   AI whipped out most of a naylib to Three.JS conversion as well, and
>> the result looks better than my hand-coded stuff, probably due to API
>> limitations.
>>
>> Just because people are in 3D graphics work doesn’t mean they like to be
>> immersed in virtual 3D.  My particular bent is mathematical visualization.
>> I’m not seeing my surfaces in Blender yet, I still want to my surfaces into
>> Blender, but that may mean extending X3D or Blender.   I hired someone to
>> get my surfaces into Blender, and they failed, despite having all my
>> working X3D source code and shaders.
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 3:51 AM Michalis Kamburelis <
>> michalis.kambi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Please don't rely on AI like this. Analyzing why AI said this, not that,
>>> is often a waste of time, in my experience.
>>>
>>> AI is guessing. But you should not be guessing. You should:
>>>
>>> - Look at documentation, of everything related (Blender Python API in
>>> general).
>>>
>>> - Walk step by step, testing snippets of code, from smaller (1-line) to
>>> larger, making sure your code does what you want in each iteration.
>>>
>>> - Do the operations in Blender, looking in Blender's Python console what
>>> your interactive operations translate to in Python. This is a great way to
>>> learn Python API.
>>>
>>> To be clear, AI can be a big help with coding. I'm using it too. But not
>>> like this. You will just waste time trying to analyze why AI is guessing
>>> wrong ("hallucinating"), trying to find some "nuggets of truth" in what AI
>>> tells you. Instead, rely on documentation and do own research.
>>>
>>> Basically, use AI to help you with *your own* solution. But don't just
>>> "take a solution from AI" and don't waste time trying to analyze why AI
>>> said something wrong.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Michalis
>>>
>>> pt., 17 sty 2025 o 18:45 John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com> napisał(a):
>>>
>>>> Looking at the screen capture some more, there’s tons of evidence that
>>>> the file got loaded, then the X3D got imported, with no cleanup in-between.
>>>>
>>>> Just confirming my intuition.
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 11:13 AM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It appears that import is messed up.  There are 2 armatures with
>>>>> gramps, when there's only one humanoid in  the file. Weird!  Looking at
>>>>> gramps in castle, everything looks good except for lighting.  I need to
>>>>> look at import code a bit more.
>>>>>
>>>>> [image: image.png]
>>>>>
>>>>> I am unsure I am able to import more than one armature.  There are
>>>>> very strange errors happening, which I can't currently solve.
>>>>>
>>>>> John
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 9:44 AM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> That’s what I’ve been doing with Joe Kick for nearly a year now.  I
>>>>>> will try to import gramps and re-export to see what’s up, now that I am
>>>>>> more confident with export.  There could be an issue with interpolators on
>>>>>> import, converting to NLA Tracks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, some of Vince and Michalis’ .blend models can use the same
>>>>>> treatment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hear you Joe, but you’re just confirming that I am doing things
>>>>>> correctly.  We just need to compare first export with second export.  I
>>>>>> don’t quite know what a Switch will do on import currently, should be
>>>>>> interesting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess there might be some interpolators which are not connected to
>>>>>> TimeSensors which could be getting included in the imported animation, but
>>>>>> importing an export should clear that up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmmm.  I wish my brain worked better.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 3:34 AM Joe D Williams <joedwil at earthlink.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why not show what this produces.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does not look complete but form for Joint node looks correct
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> with center and skinCoordIndex and skinCoordWeights.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Joe
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Sent: Jan 16, 2025 10:42 PM
>>>>>>> To: X3D Ecosystem public discussion <x3d-ecosystem at web3d.org>, Katy
>>>>>>> Schildmeyer KS APPAREL DESIGN <katy at ksappareldesign.com>, Joe D
>>>>>>> Williams <joedwil at earthlink.net>, Michalis Kamburelis <
>>>>>>> michalis.kambi at gmail.com>, Vincent Marchetti <vmarchetti at kshell.com>,
>>>>>>> Carol McDonald <cemd2 at comcast.net>, GPU Group <gpugroup at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Subject: Does this AI program generally look correct?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If we can agree that this generally looks ok, I will try to
>>>>>>> implement this in the Blender importer:
>>>>>>> https://claude.site/artifacts/7c4c15f2-1bde-4da5-9503-f4f25b09016a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I realize the bone.tail should probably be the child joint center.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I do not yet know what i am doing wrong, but my focus will be
>>>>>>> shifting to animation import after export is done to my satisfaction.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-ecosystem_web3d.org/attachments/20250121/8e47c048/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 234250 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-ecosystem_web3d.org/attachments/20250121/8e47c048/attachment-0001.png>