Rubik's Remember

[Stefan]

When John George said that it's possible to to a legit BLD, other people got confused and thought that the DVD John was referring to was "Rubik Remembered".

I don't remember people getting confused about that and just reread his message, it's absolutely clear he's talking about a different DVD. But ok, maybe some readers were still misled because of their own failure to read.

With your second comment most magicians with very rare exceptions would consider solving a Rubik's Cube blindfolded only possible with trickery.

Even if this is true, don't you think it's just because they believe it's "too hard" to do for real? It's not like it's something supernatural. Osterlind's way is (solving without having seen the cube at all, claiming to see through the eyes of his assistants).

When you first saw a BLD, did you think that he or she was peaking?

First time I saw one was after I had done it myself already. And I don't remember. But that wasn't the point anyway. point was whether people are aware it's possible, not whether they believe it's actually being done. The possibility was known to cubers way before the famous incident. We had just been relying on honesty, hoping for the best.

Also, the youtube commenters say that you're peeking, but there is no guarantee that they know how to peek.

Wait, is that supposed to be difficult?

 

[KevinK]

The magicians that invented these tricks make money from people buying their products. By learning for free, you are literally taking food off of their tables.

He is taking food off my table!!!!!

I'm poor and I do BLD for people and now he is cheating to devalue my unique abilities!
How I'm I supposed to shelter and feed my family now?

When the supply curve increases and demand stays the same, market price drops. Thanks to him I now get paid less for my BLDs, WTF2L!!!

Time to hire a ninja in pink pajamas to take him out.


KevinK,
I'm now suspicious about your Competition attempt. Did you make the solve so long that people wouldn't think that your were taking occasionally peeks during the solve?
It's BS that you've practiced BLD for years.
I learned BLD about 9 months ago, but never seriously tried until this month. Before this month, I was just doing one solve every week or so. One weekend of serious practice (maybe 60 solves) was enough to bring my times from 7min 5% accuracy to 3.5min 40% accuracy.

I'm only 12, and I learned when I was 11. I learned during spring of this year. Because you're suspicious of my attempt, ask some people that were there. Mike Hughey was there, though I don't know if he saw it. I have on video Phil Thomas and Shaden Smith seeing it. They can verify that it was legit.

I might appear biased towards magicians because because I started performing magic before I learned to solve a cube.

My comment about taking food off of someone's table by performing a trick that he or she invented without paying for it was relating just to the Enchanted Cube trick. Craig Nichols makes money by selling his ideas for other magicians to use. When uses his idea without his permission, it's stealing. And I don't think that you make money from BLD.

 

[Dene]

When uses his idea without his permission, it's stealing.

It's only stealing if the idea is patented.

 

[KevinK]

chill out fanwuq.

jude averages sub 3 at home when doing BLD, whereas he DNFed all of his attempts, which were all sup 5/6, in the UK open. kevin couldve had 2:30 DNFs for the first two, and gone really, really slow for the last.

edit, obviously not saying thats the truth, but its certainly possible.

They were actually both around six minutes. I DNFed them partially because I did edges before corners and didn't know how to fix parity like that, and partially because I screwed up.

 

[KevinK]

When uses his idea without his permission, it's stealing.

It's only stealing if the idea is patented.

Where are your ethics? That may be the legal case, but I morally equate it to stealing because it's taking someone else's intellectual property without permission.

 

[fanwuq]

When uses his idea without his permission, it's stealing.

It's only stealing if the idea is patented.

Where are your ethics? That may be the legal case, but I morally equate it to stealing because it's taking someone else's intellectual property without permission.

Wrong. Shakespeare's idea's were all borrowed from previous stories. Was he stealing?
A patent is simply an incentive for innovation.

Which is the greater evil? Cheating or stealing?
Actually, it's not even stealing because you made the trick yourself from just looking at it. It's not a real product.

 

[ShadenSmith]

I'm only 12, and I learned when I was 11. I learned during spring of this year. Because you're suspicious of my attempt, ask some people that were there. Mike Hughey was there, though I don't know if he saw it. I have on video Phil Thomas and Shaden Smith seeing it. They can verify that it was legit.

Yes, I do remember the solve. I remember because I saw the time on it and figured you were a new BLD cuber. I love seeing new BLD cubers get a success

 

[KevinK]

When John George said that it's possible to to a legit BLD, other people got confused and thought that the DVD John was referring to was "Rubik Remembered".

I don't remember people getting confused about that and just reread his message, it's absolutely clear he's talking about a different DVD. But ok, maybe some readers were still misled because of their own failure to read.

With your second comment most magicians with very rare exceptions would consider solving a Rubik's Cube blindfolded only possible with trickery.

Even if this is true, don't you think it's just because they believe it's "too hard" to do for real? It's not like it's something supernatural. Osterlind's way is (solving without having seen the cube at all, claiming to see through the eyes of his assistants).

When you first saw a BLD, did you think that he or she was peaking?

First time I saw one was after I had done it myself already. And I don't remember. But that wasn't the point anyway. point was whether people are aware it's possible, not whether they believe it's actually being done. The possibility was known to cubers way before the famous incident. We had just been relying on honesty, hoping for the best.

Also, the youtube commenters say that you're peeking, but there is no guarantee that they know how to peek.

Wait, is that supposed to be difficult?

1. I know from two years experience that magicians usually skim forum posts. I don't know why, but some of us are careless.

2. Magicians fake things that are too hard all of the time. When magicians perform escapes, they often say that they pick the locks. The truth is that lock picking takes way too much time. We bypass locks as much as possible. Lock picking is possible, but too hard. With countless hours of practice, we could probably pick locks faster than we bypass them. As I've stated before, spectators know that when a magician does something, it's a lie. When a non-magician does something, it's easy to convince them that it is genuine.

3+4. When cubers do BLD, they often move their heads around when they have difficulty remembering something. To make it very easy to see everything out of a blindfold, tilt your head back a bit. This subconscious action can make it look like you cheat. Think about it; you stop moving, tilt your head back, and start moving again. If you don't know that BLD is possible, it can look like you cheat.

 

[Dene]

When uses his idea without his permission, it's stealing.

It's only stealing if the idea is patented.

Where are your ethics? That may be the legal case, but I morally equate it to stealing because it's taking someone else's intellectual property without permission.

Well, seeing as this guy is selling a beginners method that he did not invent on DVD at a rip off price, I think he is the one in the moral wrong here.

 

[qqwref]

First, if it weren't for Kuti, most people on this forum wouldn't know that it's possible to peek.

A lot of people on this forum don't know about Kuti... but that's not the point. Before him it wasn't that cubers didn't know it was possible to look under a blindfold (because it is, if you put on a typical cubing blindfold with your eyes open you'll often notice some light), it was actually that cubers trusted each other not to cheat. If you tell a layperson who just saw a blindfold solve "that guy looked under the blindfold", the layperson isn't going to say "how?" but rather "oh, that's much less impressive now."

I might appear biased towards magicians because because I started performing magic before I learned to solve a cube.

No offense, but... you *are* biased.

I'm only 12, and I learned when I was 11.

Incidentally, you should go tell Ron. Because if you're telling the truth you belong on the 'youngest BLD solvers' list.

Well, seeing as this guy is selling a beginners method that he did not invent on DVD at a rip off price, I think he is the one in the moral wrong here.

He may have invented the beginner method himself, but they're available for free online, and a cursory search will reveal plenty of tutorials. And we already knew about looking under the blindfold. But to be fair, it seems that most of what he is selling is the experience: how to perform the trick properly so that it will appear convincing. But if this is what he's selling, how could we possibly steal the trick?


Also. Wait a minute. The DVD shop page calls Rubik Remembered a "reputation-making effect". Why hasn't the cubing community heard about this trick before?

 

[KevinK]

When uses his idea without his permission, it's stealing.

It's only stealing if the idea is patented.

Where are your ethics? That may be the legal case, but I morally equate it to stealing because it's taking someone else's intellectual property without permission.

Well, seeing as this guy is selling a beginners method that he did not invent on DVD at a rip off price, I think he is the one in the moral wrong here.

It was (sort of) his idea to combine the blindfold technique with a Rubik's Cube solve. I think that he is ripping off Richard Osterlind, but Osterlind says that it's fine for Mark Elsdon to sell it because the presentation is different. Remember that when you buy the DVD, you buy the explanation of the blindfold technique, his showmanship tips, and someone else's Rubik's Cube method. I know that the copyrights with Seven Towns was sorted out, which probably cost them a lot of money. To my knowledge (correct me if I'm wrong) David Singmaster invented the beginner's method taught on the DVD. It became public knowledge after the method was taught in a booklet that comes with the cube, and was made famous by Dan Brown's youtube tutorial. With a quick google search, you can easily (~20 min.) learn the beginner's method. What a google search can't give you is advice on getting the best audience reaction possible. This (along with the blindfold secrets) is what you pay $30 (yes, it's over-priced) for.

 

[KevinK]

First, if it weren't for Kuti, most people on this forum wouldn't know that it's possible to peek.

A lot of people on this forum don't know about Kuti... but that's not the point. Before him it wasn't that cubers didn't know it was possible to look under a blindfold (because it is, if you put on a typical cubing blindfold with your eyes open you'll often notice some light), it was actually that cubers trusted each other not to cheat. If you tell a layperson who just saw a blindfold solve "that guy looked under the blindfold", the layperson isn't going to say "how?" but rather "oh, that's much less impressive now."

I might appear biased towards magicians because because I started performing magic before I learned to solve a cube.

No offense, but... you *are* biased.

I'm only 12, and I learned when I was 11.

Incidentally, you should go tell Ron. Because if you're telling the truth you belong on the 'youngest BLD solvers' list.

Well, seeing as this guy is selling a beginners method that he did not invent on DVD at a rip off price, I think he is the one in the moral wrong here.

He may have invented the beginner method himself, but they're available for free online, and a cursory search will reveal plenty of tutorials. And we already knew about looking under the blindfold. But to be fair, it seems that most of what he is selling is the experience: how to perform the trick properly so that it will appear convincing. But if this is what he's selling, how could we possibly steal the trick?


Also. Wait a minute. The DVD shop page calls Rubik Remembered a "reputation-making effect". Why hasn't the cubing community heard about this trick before?

1. I guess that the statement was a little too bold. I meant that if it weren't for Kuti, you guys wouldn't be mad that someone is teaching how to cheat at BLD.

2. I know that I'm biased, but I'm the only one that sees this from the magician's perspective, because I was a magician before I became a cuber.

3. I did message Jim Mertens, who was the delegate for the tournament, but he didn't reply. Anyone know how to contact Ron?

4. You got this from the magician's perspective. This is really why magicians buy it.

5. I've known about this since the week it was released, but I'm a magician.

 

[pjk]

KevinK: Perhaps you don't understand where we are all coming from. Can you solve a cube blindfolded, legitimately? It is easy. Getting fast is the hard part. Why not simply spend the time to legitimately do it, and then perform? As I said before, and as QQ mentioned, we don't appreciate anyone (including magicians) to fake something that we spend hours practicing. I'm surprised Mike Hughey didn't tell you what he thought about it (someone who has competed in pretty much every weekly competition here this year [52 of them], including many, many hours of 3x3-7x7 BLD).

Yes, if you click on my WCA profile, you can see that I can legitimately BLD. It's much easier to solve a cube than to solve in blind, although anyone can BLD. We don't spend hours practicing BLD to impress other people. We practice to accomplish a difficult task. BLD does impress other people, though. Doing a fake BLD does entertain, even if you know that it's fake. Whenever a magician performs something, you know that it's fake without the magician having to say, "I want you to know that the next thing I'm going to do is fake, even though I'm going to try to convince you that it isn't." When someone says that they're a magician, they say that everything that they perform is a lie.

I disagree.

anyway, I've laid out my points, and if you don't agree, there is nothing more that I can say. But I absolutely hate seeing people "fake" blindfold solves; it does convince the general public that we all "fake" them.

I'm surprised Mike Hughey didn't tell you what he thought about it (someone who has competed in pretty much every weekly competition here this year [52 of them], including many, many hours of 3x3-7x7 BLD).

Thanks, pjk, but I guess I really don't mind all that much. I do this primarily for my own amusement, although it's nice to have other people amazed by it occasionally. I LOVE solving a 3x3x3 under a table at a restaurant while several of the servers gather and watch in utter amazement. But I figure the best solution to this is to continue to increase the popularity of cubing. As more and more people learn that BLD is possible (and even not that hard), this trick will be less and less impressive - eventually people will be totally unimpressed by the magicians' tricks.

I still rather like the idea of fooling the magicians (beating them at their own game, as it were). Can you imagine how befuddled Ville could make them if he suddenly sold his act as a magic act?

I do it for my own amusement as well, but I do hate people faking it and playing it off as real.

1. I guess that the statement was a little too bold. I meant that if it weren't for Kuti, you guys wouldn't be mad that someone is teaching how to cheat at BLD.

2. I know that I'm biased, but I'm the only one that sees this from the magician's perspective, because I was a magician before I became a cuber.

3. I did message Jim Mertens, who was the delegate for the tournament, but he didn't reply. Anyone know how to contact Ron?

4. You got this from the magician's perspective. This is really why magicians buy it.

5. I've known about this since the week it was released, but I'm a magician.

I see it from a magicians prospective, and that doesn't change my view at all. I used to practice magic way before I cubed, and that still doesn't change my thoughts about this.

 

[mrbiggs]

1. I guess that the statement was a little too bold. I meant that if it weren't for Kuti, you guys wouldn't be mad that someone is teaching how to cheat at BLD.

Not true. Or, at least, not true for me. I'm mad because it cheapens what I work for. If I used a couple of video effects and paid a couple of "spectators" to replicate some of David Blaine's tricks, he'd be pretty mad. His tricks would look stupid and cheap because my trick was stupid and cheap. He practiced sleight of hand and thought about the tricks for years and years, and I'm using a couple of effects to get the same result. Meanwhile, I'm losing the trust of the audience. When someone sees me do a BLD solve, there's always a certain amount of trust that I'm not gaming the system somehow. They don't know how a rubik's cube works, or whether or not I'm truly blindfolded, or how scrambled the cube is. When I do a demonstration, it's based on them trusting me to solve it legitimately. This guy is not solving it legitimately, taking credit for actually accomplishing something other people spend a lot of time working for, and is doing it using cheating methods which I am trusted to abstain from.

In other words, he's making what I do less worthwhile by cheating and I'm not a fan.

 

[KevinK]

@PJK:

People don't always play it off as real. I do hate it when "psychics" claim that what they do is real. If someone is ever less impressed by one of your BLD solves because a magician did the same trick, then you can complain. So far, no damage has been done, and I doubt that damage will be done.

@mrbiggs:

I don't think that David would care. He performs magic because he loves the look of astonishment on his spectators' faces. Magic just happens to be a way that he can make money. If you did the cheap tricks, it's not the same result. When Mark Elsdon performs "Rubik Remembered," he doesn't have the same feeling of self accomplishment that you do when you have a successful BLD. The reasons for both of your BLDs are very different. This trick won't make people think that your BLDs are fake. If anything, it'll make them think that you have a skill that's very hard to aquire; a magician cheated to do the same thing, so BLD must be hard!