digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

I Can't Belive it's Not Flash! Addictive game in under 200 lines of JS.

wholewheatweb.com — With the release of Prototype 1.6, and Scriptaculous 1.8, it's remarkable what you can do with so little Javascript. And it's _way_ more stable than the last major version!

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • MonsterChaOS, on 11/14/2007, -31/+72Awesome use of JS. Who needs flash anyway‽
    • xutopia, on 11/12/2007, -19/+5That's what I've been saying all along! :-D
      • brentaun, on 11/11/2007, -3/+9Too bad Flash isn't going away anytime soon.
    • timdorr, on 11/11/2007, -3/+99Because it's not 200 lines of JS.

      http://wholewheatweb.com/javascripts/prototype.js That doesn't look like 200 lines to me...

      Also, it's 121KB!! That doesn't even count Scriptalicious :S

      JQuery and the full JQuery suite is under 100KB. Why exactly are people using Prototype still?
    • Saea, on 11/11/2007, -19/+13Correct use of the interbang.

      Your dugg.
    • bitcloud, on 11/11/2007, -5/+19flash is closed... That's it's only flaw. If you could output into a machine readable, reverse engineerable format you'd have an amazing standard.

      This "ajax" elitism is using a hammer for the job of a screwdriver, just to please google...
      • Scaryclouds, on 11/14/2007, -5/+2...And the fact it requires a lot more bandwidth...
        • SamR, on 11/14/2007, -1/+4More bandwidth? Get your facts straight. Flash tends to require a fraction of the bandwidth of an HTML/CSS/JS site. Flash itself is compiled and compressed and communications are typically done in a binary format called AMF which is much smaller than JSON or XML.
    • gerryk, on 11/11/2007, -0/+21Ok, just so you understand... CSS/Javascript != Ajax
    • smee, on 11/14/2007, -3/+27people who don't want to run a 120k javascript app for something crappy you could write in flash with a lot less effort? why the hate on flash? the latest player has 90%+ penetration and allows some fantastic stuff
      • MellerTime, on 11/14/2007, -2/+11Agreed. Use the right tool for the right job, just like anything else...
      • iJyrki, on 11/11/2007, -13/+1Because Flash is way heavier than JS on Linux & Mac.
        • digitalpencil, on 11/11/2007, -0/+9Flash runs fine on Linux and OS/X
          • knugen, on 11/14/2007, -7/+1Flash is INCREDIBLY unstable on Safari (presumably other browsers too), especially under Leopard.
          • Stirk, on 11/14/2007, -0/+3Flash works fine on Safari in Leopard. I'm using it to play tower defense as I type this message.
        • Scaryclouds, on 11/14/2007, -4/+1It's still heavier...
        • brentaun, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1Not really.
      • maexus, on 11/12/2007, -1/+5It's a closed standard.
        • fredclown, on 11/14/2007, -1/+3So? Just because it is closed does not mean it isn't good. Photoshop for example ... closed and yet still THE best image editing software available. Closed does not mean bad, and open does not mean good. There are some pretty crappy open source programs out there.
    • geoken, on 11/14/2007, -1/+20Just to put an actual number out there, I pasted the code in timdorr's link into my text editor.

      Grand total: 4184 Lines
      • xutopia, on 11/11/2007, -3/+1Did you count the HTML lines as well?

        Seriously less than 200 lines of code were written to make this game. The libraries used should not count.
        • NGliam, on 11/14/2007, -1/+4Of course the libraries count. Without them, the game would not be.. I could make a Flash "library" then implement it into a Flash file in less than 10 lines if that is the case. To be fair I could probably write a "game" like this in less than 200 actual lines in Flash, and it would be a lot less buggy.
        • fredclown, on 11/14/2007, -1/+2Ok, so if say I were a .Net developer, for example, and I wrote an app ... does that mean that I have to count the line numbers of all the .Net classes and methods that I use? For that matter should I count all the lines of code used to create the PHP cgi for a .php website that I create? Uh no. I think it's totally ok so say that he wrote it in under 200 lines of JS, because he did.
        • brentaun, on 11/13/2007, -1/+0Libraries DO count! They're the effing guts of the application.
    • parkermauney, on 11/11/2007, -1/+4it's _way_ more
      Can someone explain to me why people do that with the underscores?
    • pault107, on 11/14/2007, -1/+7As much as this is interesting use of JS, the game is a pile of crap. Try just clicking around randomly and quickly - the game dies. I could knock this up in Flash in two or three hours and it would be bug free and probably smaller in file size.

      Check this screenshot to see had badly it fails (scroll down):

      http://www.zuubu.com/images/js_crap.png
    • Calcularius, on 11/11/2007, -1/+2I got the same thing as pault107, I wasn't even doing it that fast.

      oh BTW, did everyone know a lot of console games use flash?
      http://www.scaleform.com
    • svivian, on 11/20/2007, -0/+1http://www.doheth.co.uk/bluedot/dhtml/boxfactory/
      Fun game, just under 700 lines of JS (could be much less), no slow frameworks.

      /shameless self-promotion ;)
  • blogspinner, on 11/13/2007, -47/+8The game has no explanations, so I wasn't too impressed with aimlessly clicking on squares, wondering what I was doing. However, it shows how much potential there is with JS.
    • dahuf, on 11/11/2007, -3/+19No explanation except for the one in the beginning... i hope you're being sarcastic. It's the utter simplicity that's addicting!
      • obxjdt, on 11/11/2007, -4/+2Woops, sorry dude, meant to give you a digg!!!!!
        I was going to say the same thing....
    • MisterNetHead, on 11/11/2007, -1/+2Umm... its a collapse clone. You know, one of those games that everybody knows how to play, like tetris or pac-man or breakout.
    • jpinsonault, on 11/10/2007, -1/+1um... if this shows off what JS is capable of... wow, that's sad. I'm sure most of us see more impressive uses of javascript on a daily basis.
  • Salgat, on 11/13/2007, -4/+154It's buggy though, click a single square multiple times and it glitches.
    • xutopia, on 11/11/2007, -4/+2The author blogged about that issue in his blog if you follow his name.
      • ImpactedColon, on 11/13/2007, -3/+39Better to fix a bug than to blog about it.
      • bitcloud, on 11/11/2007, -3/+15oh awesome! he blogged about it!

        he could have ahm... you know.. made it in flash..
        nice proof of concept, but you're all slowing down the development of the internet by pretending everything can be done in javascript...
        • riah, on 11/11/2007, -1/+2I'd rather it see it go Javascript/SVG than some prorietary tech like Flash or Silverlight.
        • solistus, on 11/13/2007, -1/+41. Flash is bad. It's resource intensive, proprietary and a pain to interface with other technologies.
          2. The more that can be done in Javascript, the better. Offloading non-server-related tasks to user-end scripts is good web design.
          3. This CAN be done in Javascript. Nobody is pretending. The point is to determine what Javascript _can_ do. It's user-end and much lighter on resources than Flash, not to mention being a non-proprietary scripting language that can easily be integrated with server-side processes via AJAX techniques.
    • porplem, on 11/13/2007, -0/+50Sure does! My game sprung a leak: http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/1125/leakqr8.pn ...
  • royall64, on 11/12/2007, -12/+49I find Tiny Pacman more fun: http://www.guimp.com/pacman_flash.html
    • xutopia, on 11/11/2007, -2/+11that's flash though.
    • cococooky, on 11/12/2007, -4/+19WTF? Tiny alright, its only a 6mm square at my native resolution.
    • Killbot2015, on 11/11/2007, -1/+5tiny pacman is awesome!
      • Atomic1fire, on 11/11/2007, -0/+1and flash not dhtml (js+html+css and maybe even at times ajax)
    • ghgh1212, on 11/11/2007, -0/+0OUCH, MY EYES!!!!
    • svivian, on 11/20/2007, -0/+1Super-easy with Opera's zoom function :D
    • Megalion, on 11/30/2007, -0/+0Wow that is Tiny... Amusing for a few rounds though.
  • Coal, on 11/11/2007, -9/+7Anyone beat a score of 1264? :)
    • Renork, on 11/13/2007, -1/+10Pics or it didn't happen.
    • jveezy, on 11/11/2007, -1/+18Yes.

      http://chickensdoclap.com/images/Samegame1306.png

      Eat it.
    • DestroyFascism, on 11/10/2007, -5/+2Shopped
      • ostracize, on 11/11/2007, -1/+5We just can't win...
        Pics or it didn't happen! -> Shopped!
        • mattcoady, on 11/11/2007, -0/+16Video displaying your score with you holding todays news paper or it didn't happen.
    • bingobongony, on 11/11/2007, -2/+4All luck. Depends on how evenly distributed yje colors are.
      http://chapinstreet.googlepages.com/boxxi.jpg
      • bingobongony, on 11/10/2007, -0/+3Actually, I should have said that it depends on how UNevenly the colors are distributed. On mine, I happened to get lucky and get a 34 block score for 1156. But with 100 blocks and 4 colors, that is unusual, especially since there were some leftover blocks of that color. (And I almost ruined the big one trying to get those too.) If they are all pretty even, the best you are going to get is about a 25 block score which is 625. Then all the little scores you get along the way.
    • JenadaeXX, on 11/10/2007, -2/+1http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v177/JenadaeX/bo ...
    • bingobongony, on 11/10/2007, -3/+2Pretty funny that people would bury scores. I guesthat they want to be the high score.
      Yes, obviously fake ones like 6000+ sure. (the highest score is 10,000, and that would be if every single block to start the game was one color). Butto bury all higher scores is kind of funny.
    • drworthless, on 11/10/2007, -0/+31450 is my highest. Really just refresh until you get a lot of one color and then work it out. I bet I can get higher...Very cool game too
    • thegoodtomchi, on 11/10/2007, -1/+1dr worthless is right. Just keep refreshing until most of the screen is one color, then remove the ones that are not of that color. Then you get huge points when you clear that color. I just got 1281.
    • Howsmydriving, on 11/10/2007, -0/+2I managed to get 1718. Just refreshed until 3/4 of it was blue...
    • mjl5629, on 11/10/2007, -0/+1http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h233/mjl5629/Pro ...
    • Camphlobactor, on 11/11/2007, -0/+3No, l got a 404
      http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2221/1947944172_056 ...
    • trib4lmaniac, on 11/10/2007, -0/+1If you have Firebug or similar, run this line of code and then start a new game for an easy 10k score:

      SameGame.prototype.colors = [SameGame.prototype.colors[0]];
    • Dan11023, on 11/11/2007, -4/+3congratulations!!!

      you reached 1,000,000 points!

      you are


      FAGGGGGGGSSSSS
  • EXTER, on 11/10/2007, -11/+2Crashes Firefox when I hit the refresh button.
  • mikesbaker, on 11/13/2007, -9/+199I can believe that its not flash
    • neuropsychguy, on 11/14/2007, -4/+121I'm going to get Dugg down for this but Flash would look and run (i.e., be more responsive) better.
      Granted, it's great for JS but, meh.
      • Trent0090, on 11/11/2007, -0/+1But that's the point. It's ok not great but the fact it was made on js makes it pretty good instead of meh.
    • quieType, on 11/11/2007, -3/+2i am a believer as well
    • FlynnRocks, on 11/11/2007, -0/+4No you can't, no one can!
    • SingerSirCoda, on 11/12/2007, -0/+4I can tell by the pixels.
  • Twist05, on 11/11/2007, -9/+3What a fun game!
  • shadowspawn, on 11/11/2007, -4/+6This is pretty cool for javascript. I have this game for my PDA tho.
    • M4v3rIC, on 11/11/2007, -0/+1Yea, this game is also known as "Bubble Breaker" on Windows Mobile 6 phones.
  • scottpigeon, on 11/11/2007, -11/+3Yeah? Well I can't believe it's not butter! Ba dum chinnnng!
  • aazn, on 11/11/2007, -16/+1Saw it before the digg.
  • bingobongony, on 11/11/2007, -1/+8Good for javascript..but I am amazed at so many comments that seem to imply that no one has seen this game before. It has been around (called Boxxi usually) for at least 6-7 years. It is a Megatouch staple
  • oduska, on 11/13/2007, -3/+8I got a high score!!! And all I had to do was click aimlessly! http://i10.tinypic.com/6pqrfo6.jpg

    :)
    • blackfett, on 11/12/2007, -0/+2yeah if you click fast enough it cant keep up and seems to die (e.g your screenshot)
      you can get a high score though :P
  • JenadaeXX, on 11/14/2007, -20/+20I think this shows exactly why we don't use JS anymore...
    • r3negadeX, on 08/11/2008, -0/+17He says as his web browser runs 12 scripts upon loading this page.
    • diggdick, on 11/12/2007, -0/+7we?
    • solistus, on 11/12/2007, -0/+12Who doesn't use JS anymore? That's the most ridiculous web design claim I've heard in a long time. JS has become one of the most important web technologies due to the whole Web 2.0 thing. You know that nifty "AJAX" thing you've heard about? The thing that drives sites like Gmail and, well, Digg? Guess what? IT'S DONE IN JAVASCRIPT. Javascript is actually the ONLY required language for AJAX solutions; you can use any server-side script you want (PHP, Perl, Ruby, etc.), but Javascript is the only reliable option for user-side stuff.
    • DiggDug2006, on 11/12/2007, -2/+1Hey, easy now folks, easy... not everybody understands the basics of web design. We need to be careful to acknowledge those people who stare blindly at Dreamweaver or.... oh god, Frontpage... and claim to know exactly what "we" are all doing.
  • digitallysick, on 11/12/2007, -1/+7to bad it doesn't keep score vs everyone else
    • xutopia, on 11/10/2007, -0/+4Anyone could cheat though because this is Javascript. A simple one liner would give you any score you wanted => $('score').update(25000). This was only built with the intent of seeing any difference with the older versions of Prototype and Scriptaculous and the current one.
      • Atomic1fire, on 11/11/2007, -0/+1pretty much the same reason its a bad idea to use cookies to make save files (such as in the case of the need for madness java game which could be edited with the firefox cookie editor extension so one could easly unlock all the levels and cars)
        because anyone could edit them
        well that and they would be eventually timed out and deleted
  • Kratos76, on 11/12/2007, -2/+4Wooohooo! 609!
  • winningseven, on 11/11/2007, -8/+1too bad it's just copying a game that is already out
    • frozenpxl, on 11/11/2007, -6/+1Burried. This game was on Neopets decades ago.
    • r3negadeX, on 08/11/2008, -1/+10The game itself isn't the point, dumb *****, it's the fact that it was made with JavaScript.
  • joe361, on 11/12/2007, -9/+20One word LAME.
  • compgeek, on 11/11/2007, -5/+2dugg very addicting so far at 575
    • limewood, on 11/11/2007, -0/+4if you're trying to maximize your score, i've found that you are better off trying to get a huge block over clearing the board. imho, that's a flawed scoring system since it's much harder to clear the board than to try and get one color group all bunched up.
  • brinkness, on 11/12/2007, -2/+9+1 for crafty JS
    -1 for causing firefox to consume my system resources after 6 games and driving the load up to 60
    • trinest, on 11/12/2007, -19/+2Your using Firefox, your fult.
      • Atomic1fire, on 11/12/2007, -0/+2your being a troll
        your fult you got dugg down
    • r3negadeX, on 08/11/2008, -0/+16@ trinest: Your stupidity astonishes me
      • richardhenry, on 11/11/2007, -0/+3His stupidity is hurting us all.
  • Wildhoney, on 11/10/2007, -1/+2Quite an addictive game but also quite buggy, and uses Prototype so there's obviously many short-handed ways to write the code. A little deceptive but still rather impressive!
  • skinrock, on 11/11/2007, -1/+18It's pretty cool, but technically if you're using Prototype and Scriptaculous, it's not under 200 lines is it?
    • davmacbea, on 11/10/2007, -1/+2Is that not the same as saying a "hello word" application in Java is thousands of lines long when you include the code in the String class?
    • geoken, on 11/11/2007, -0/+5No, because that code is included in the client side app.

      @ skinrock
      Even without the imported classes it's way more than 200 lines. Read the subcomments under the first post, a guy posted the link to the actual code and it's WAY more than 200 lines. It's actually closer to 4200 lines.
  • KingBunny, on 11/14/2007, -5/+9Holy *****... You could make a freaking graphical action game with that much code (it's wayyy more than 200 lines), and also it would be MUCH faster to program, and it would look better in Flash. (pwned)
    • xutopia, on 11/10/2007, -2/+2MUCH faster to program? This was done in less than a day's work. I'll give you 36 hours to see how well you do with your flash game.
      • CSharpSauce, on 11/10/2007, -1/+2i'd like to see you write the same code in less then a days work. You can't pit one technology against another and expect legitimate results with 2 different programmers with 2 different levels of skill.
      • mikemx, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1you dumb noob piece of *****, actionscript and javascript are both based on ecmascript standard i.e they are very similar
        actionscript would however be quicker to develop for a s you wouldn't need to do any cross-browser/os hacks
        so stfu noob fool
  • topgigmedia, on 11/11/2007, -3/+6w/ flash you can build something like this in an hour. I bet it took a lot of wasted time doing this in JS - still cool - just reinventing the wheel in my opinion :)
  • mhusson, on 11/11/2007, -4/+11this is actually almost 8,000 lines of javascript. why wouldn't you consider javascript libraries part of your "lines of code" count?
    • chebuctonian, on 11/10/2007, -3/+4Cause you don't have to write them, that's why. Do you count the LOC in all of Flash when you write a Flash game? The LOC of Linux when you write a web app or command-line utility?
      • joebaloney, on 11/10/2007, -2/+0LOC of Linux?
      • Bamborzled, on 11/12/2007, -0/+3Yeah, but the Flash runtime environment is included.
        • Atomic1fire, on 11/11/2007, -0/+1you wouldnt recreate flash every time you wanted to make a flash game now would you?
          I say let the libraries be used
      • hysterix, on 11/11/2007, -0/+0You are an idiot chebuctonian. So let me get this straight, you write me a million lines of php code that cures cancer. I write one extra line that calls the function cureCancer(), so now I can claim I cured cancer with only one line of code? You are a moron, every line of code you use in your program counts, whether you wrote it or not. LRN2PROGRAM you obviously don't know a thing about it.

        *Cue bragging about how leet of a c++ programmer you are*
        • chebuctonian, on 11/12/2007, -0/+2If you can cure cancer with one millions lines of PHP code, you are a much better programmer than I.

          Congratulations, Sir.
    • dotancohen, on 11/10/2007, -0/+4You are right. The browser must download and parse those lines of code, so they count. No matter who wrote them.
    • arizonagroove, on 11/10/2007, -1/+7Because that wouldn't make for such a good headline! Are you new here? This is digg, accuracy of the headline doesn't matter so long as it sounds good.
    • solistus, on 11/12/2007, -0/+4When discussing LOC counts, one always omits non-custom libraries. The point of counting LOC is not to know how much the browser has to parse, but to know how difficult the code was to write, edit and maintain. By your logic, a "Hello, World!" Java applet should be counted as hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of lines of code, because pretty much all Java code includes a massive chunk of library code.
      • hysterix, on 11/12/2007, -0/+1Thank you, couldn't have said it better.
  • snugglebear, on 11/12/2007, -6/+2Considering it froze my firefox when I opened it in another tab and that its not very slick nor very efficient on my cpu's, lets leave games for flash.
  • NotOptium, on 11/11/2007, -2/+14Just because it's not flash doesn't make it a particularly good game.
  • sparkweb, on 11/11/2007, -0/+3Now this is really fun. (There sure is a lot of negativsm on Digg...) I got 1200 which I thought was pretty cool, and then I won! I'll show what it looked like moments before: http://i1.tinypic.com/73mv5o6.jpg

    (and ironically, just as I got to this point my whole window froze up and went black. I almost lost it! Memory leaks!)
  • robmcw, on 11/12/2007, -1/+2i had to make a similar game (but with circles instead of cubes...) for a CS course on web development. we used CSS and Javascript... i don't see what the big deal is.
  • dotancohen, on 11/10/2007, -0/+1This game had me addicted when I had a Dell Axim, as it is standard on the PocketPC. As a matter of fact, the only reason that the Ax is not in the trash is so that the wife can play it.
  • HiT0, on 11/11/2007, -1/+3that was fun for about 45 seconds until I froze up my browser
  • I922sParkCir, on 11/11/2007, -0/+8My colourblindness make me sad. :(
    • xutopia, on 11/10/2007, -0/+1Would you have a color palette of 4 colors that would make this game more enjoyable for you?
      • I922sParkCir, on 11/11/2007, -0/+1Well, I can see yellows pretty well. Blues and purples look the same, brown, and green look the same, orange and red look the same, so you can count the similarities as one color. There's 4. I usually prefer patterns though.
  • r3negadeX, on 08/11/2008, -2/+5As much as I would like to see Flash off the net for good, this is a crappy substitute.
    • digitalpencil, on 11/14/2007, -0/+5Seriously.. what's with all the hating on Flash? Granted it's often used in situtations that don't warrant it, but it's an amazing, light-weight & powerful platform offering great market plugin permeaton. AS3 has amazing potential as a language, video delivery could not be more accessible especially when crossed with flash comm server & in terms of interface design... some of the work out there is just flat-out art!
      • cros, on 11/14/2007, -0/+5You're absolutely right and the reason everyone hates on flash is two fold: 1) they have no idea what the technology is actually like and 2) it has been used for some really junky stuff. However the same could be said for the GIF format or hell HTML has had people use it to ugly and annoying ends. Why don't we try and get rid of it too?
        • Blafhert, on 11/14/2007, -3/+13) Flash is expensive and closed-source.
        • Atomic1fire, on 11/14/2007, -2/+1or when they create flashy ads that use js so you cant rip or block them unless you disable js
  • ZXDrew, on 11/11/2007, -0/+3The game is on palm phones running windows pocket... its called bubble breaker
    • mpeters13, on 11/10/2007, -0/+1As opposed to... Windows Mobile phones...? :D
  • stockjones, on 11/11/2007, -1/+4I can believe its JS and not flash. Whether you like it or not things like Flex and Silverlight will take functionality on the web a lot farther than standard JS, Ajax etc.
  • GeneralKickass, on 11/10/2007, -0/+3Same as Jawbreaker on the pocketPC.
  • phaed, on 11/11/2007, -2/+2Source?
  • trikol, on 11/11/2007, -2/+2It is a great game tough.
  • Zonet, on 11/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah! This is what I'm talking about! Do much with little and use everything to its fullest! Wonderfull!
  • hujujuj, on 11/10/2007, -0/+1http://xwuz.com/bubble/game.html far better.
  • arizonagroove, on 11/11/2007, -1/+6"I Can't Belive it's Not Flash!"

    I can't believe you didn't bother to spell check. Or that this game seems to have an entire domain dedicated to it.
    • Almightymole, on 11/10/2007, -0/+2I cant believe its not butter either...
    • brentaun, on 11/11/2007, -1/+0I can't belive it was still readable, *****.
  • EarlPolliwog, on 11/10/2007, -0/+0http://i8.tinypic.com/6jbbez9.png
  • Wacer, on 11/10/2007, -2/+2Yawwn. Javascript is way to high-level language to make this worthwhile. The people or person that thinks that this is the way have not programmed all the way from Assembly to Pascal. Java is nice but there are limitations (Not enough CPU Speed). Javascript is great for its intended purposes. Trying to make perform like a SR-71 to laughable at best.
    Even the people who made flash understand this. I'll digg it for the effort though.
    • koft, on 11/10/2007, -0/+2Looks like the authors use of Javascript lines up with it's intended purpose i.e. dynamic content on a web app.
  • datastuff, on 11/11/2007, -4/+1if u want an addictive game try this one

    http://www.sharewareisland.com/playonlinegames.asp ...

  • gneeot, on 11/10/2007, -0/+3It's buggy. After few fast random clicks bars are all around page
  • pelline, on 11/10/2007, -1/+1My IE7 crashes everytime I try to open it.. :-)

    good thing I also use firefox.
    I hate the game, (maybe because I'm bad at it).
  • juicebag, on 11/12/2007, -4/+1Runescape, even though it sucks, is a much better example of what Java is capable of.
  • naj0rt, on 11/12/2007, -1/+3I managed to get rid of every square.
  • dummersack, on 11/12/2007, -1/+3boring game and includes bugs:
    http://img463.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bugop3.jp ...
  • ninjan, on 11/10/2007, -0/+1Clicked "NEW GAME" popup-window tells me "looks like we have an error" in Firefox.
    Worked fine in IE.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 99 of 99 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.