Claudus

Try Patrick’s Parabox, best Sokoban game I’ve played, by far.

I’ve solved about 250 puzzles (only exploring North and East so far), and haven’t seen any repetition. The game is great, and so far much more doable without spoilers than The Witness (the obelisk puzzles required massive amounts of time and effort to solve).

I haven’t had to use any random trial and error / guessing, just logic and thinking through game mechanics and discovering new interactions, and the satisfaction so far is much higher than 90% of puzzle games, with a smooth progression.

The dialog is the only area where I have meaningful criticism so far, but that seems like more of a budget reality, and the puzzles are what really matters.

This is a game for people who like puzzles, spend 5 or 10 minutes and solve a few when you need a break. Compare this to Patrick’s Parabox which has over 350 great puzzles, but you can cruise through in around 20 hours (barely a snack), or another great game with over 750 puzzles, A Monster’s Expedition that will run about 80 hours of play time.

Complaining about being exhausted after 20 hours of play time seems like it is coming from a reviewer in the wrong genre trying to make a deadline, and is probably better off sticking to something like Candy Crush Saga.

Hate to see his thoughts on some of the more “exhausting” puzzle games like Baba is You, Blue Prince, The Golem, Understand... Or heaven forbid, something like Raitlin’s Challenge.

Dear little Krumalura, I don't want to grow up, never ever.

Smart glasses are for citizens, not subjects.

More details: https://www.justice.gov/crt/media/1440601/dl

Since the existence of God is implicit in your assertion, are you suggesting he isn’t omnipotent, or have you come up with a new definitional concept of ownership? Or maybe you just don’t believe in the existence of typewriters.

If you think that I believe the Constitution “grant” rights, then your comment is meaningless (and you lack basic comprehension).

…or, Baal, Nature, Reason, etc. take your pick, heck probably even AI; which would “happily” explain it to you and answer all your “clever” questions, unlike me.

Rights are granted by God, the Constitution merely acknowledges them. If you don’t believe in God, or think human hierarchies determine rights, then they aren’t really rights anymore. They are privileges.

Bob Ross died 30 years ago, and Mr. Roger’s died over 20 years ago. Basing your argument on decades old examples is a pretty clear indicator of its merits.

I asked Grok to review the comments here and generate a response defending AI:

After reviewing the discussion on the Hacker News thread, it’s clear that there are a range of complaints and criticisms about AI, particularly centered around its limitations, overhype, and practical utility. Some users express frustration with AI’s inability to handle complex reasoning, its tendency to produce generic or incorrect outputs, and the perception that it’s more of a buzzword than a transformative tool. Others question its value compared to traditional methods or human expertise, suggesting it’s overhyped or misapplied in many cases. Below, I’ll offer a defense of AI that addresses these concerns while highlighting its strengths and potential.

AI isn’t perfect, and no one should claim it is—but that’s not the point. It’s a tool, and like any tool, its effectiveness depends on how it’s used. Critics who point to AI’s struggles with nuanced reasoning or edge cases often overlook the fact that it’s not designed to replace human judgment entirely. Instead, it excels at augmenting it. For example, AI can process vast amounts of data—far more than any human could in a reasonable timeframe—and identify patterns or insights that might otherwise go unnoticed. This makes it invaluable in fields like medicine, where it’s already helping diagnose diseases from imaging data, or in logistics, where it optimizes supply chains with precision that manual methods can’t match.

The complaint about generic or incorrect outputs, often dubbed “hallucinations,” is fair but misses the bigger picture. Yes, AI can churn out nonsense if pushed beyond its limits or fed poor data—but that’s a reflection of its current stage of development, not its ultimate potential. These systems are improving rapidly, with each iteration reducing errors and refining capabilities. More importantly, AI’s ability to generate starting points—like drafts, code snippets, or hypotheses—saves time and effort. It’s not about delivering flawless results every time; it’s about accelerating the process so humans can refine and perfect the output. A programmer tweaking AI-generated code is still faster than writing it from scratch.

As for the overhype, it’s true that the buzz can get out of hand—marketing teams love a shiny new toy. But beneath the noise, real progress is happening. AI’s contributions aren’t always flashy; they’re often mundane but critical, like automating repetitive tasks or enhancing search algorithms. The critics who say it’s just a “fancy autocomplete” underestimate how transformative that can be. Autocomplete might sound trivial until you realize it’s powering real-time language translation or helping scientists sift through research papers at scale. These aren’t sci-fi fantasies—they’re practical applications delivering value today.

Finally, the notion that AI can’t match human expertise in complex domains ignores its complementary role. It’s not here to outthink a seasoned expert but to amplify their reach. A lawyer using AI to review contracts doesn’t lose their skill—they gain efficiency. A researcher leveraging AI to analyze data doesn’t stop hypothesizing—they get to test more ideas. The technology’s strength lies in its ability to handle the grunt work, freeing humans to focus on creativity and judgment.

AI isn’t a silver bullet, and it’s not without flaws. But the criticisms often stem from inflated expectations or a failure to see its incremental, practical benefits. It’s not about replacing humans—it’s about making us better at what we do. The trajectory is clear: as it evolves, AI will continue to refine its capabilities and prove its worth, not as a standalone genius, but as a partner in progress.

Record seems to be ~115, while current is ~63, or 55%.

I remember learning Prolog, it was tricky to wrap my mind around it, it wasn’t like any other language. The day I finally “got it” I was very happy, until I realized all the other languages I had previously learned, no longer made any sense.

I prefer MPC-HC.

Laravel, once you get the hang of it everything just works, and using a debug bar to optimize database calls is very satisfying.

More free than a person who can not afford to house themselves, and less free than a person who cannot feed themselves (because they are dead).

I remember searching my library for every book I could find on computers and hacking, there weren’t many, but I somehow stumbled upon The Cuckoos Egg while flipping through the ancient wooden drawers of the card catalog in my local library. It really was one of the most magical books I’ve ever read. Since then I’ve had many exciting experiences of my own in the digital world, and I owe that in part to Clifford Stoll for painting such a vivid an exciting view of his own experiences that helped shape my own imagination.

Yet notice, behind the facade, taskkill runs.

To me, it seems like people writing these articles should be careful to avoid inaccuracies and overstatements in their writing. The very first sentence of the article includes the phrase “on track to be”.

My grandmother had a plum bush about 12 feet high that would produce thousands of plums every year. We would eat a few hundred, but about 90% would be “wasted”. Of course, they rotted back into the soil and provided nourishment for other living things.

Luckily, the bush is dead now, and all that food is no longer being wasted.

This is the 7th annual rather difficult puzzle challenge released each year at the start of DEF CON by the Illuminati Party.

So you think if he advertised it better, more people would download Truth Social from the Play Store?

Depends on how efficient you are, I prepare 18/21 meals a week at home, and have been doing this for years).

I spend 1 hour every two weeks getting groceries for ~$120. I spend 1.5 hours every two weeks (5 minutes a day + 20 minutes to prep 14 “containers”) preparing breakfast and rinsing dishes from the previous day for the dishwasher). My breakfast is cooked oat bran with walnuts, flax seed, wheat germ, Ceylon cinnamon, cacao, blueberries, raisins, chia seeds, pumpkin seeds, 4oz orange juice, fish oil, vitamins d3, k2.

I spend 2.5 hours a week (5 to 15 minutes a day) preparing lunch, typically steamed vegetables + 150 grams chicken + 1 cup dry instant brown rice cooked OR salmon + simple salad + sweet potatoes OR 8oz unsalted black beans with fresh guacamole OR lentils OR potato and egg tacos with homemade salsa OR “fried” rice, etc.

I spend the same preparing dinner with same / similar dishes as lunch.

I also snack on fresh fruit / vegetables between meals sometimes.

Roughly $240 and 15 hours a month (30 minutes a day) for all food prep + cleanup, and yes, the numbers are accurate as I have timed myself over a two week period in the past, if anything I’m probably faster now. I’m sure there are other factors that can add extra time, but for me, a single guy in the US, I spend less time and money cooking healthy delicious meals at home than I did going out to eat, and only slightly more time than heating up frozen dinners, which I think is more than compensated for by the resulting health benefits.

I’m surprised a company doesn’t sell the product for a lower price... Oh, the US prevents this due to patent laws? Then diminish the patent rights... Oh, that would stifle innovation? Hmm, I imagine mandating lower prices might have the same effect.

Well, I found two that were particularly insightful and applicable to the rest of the list:

“Half the skill of being educated is learning what you can ignore.”

and:

“90% of everything is crap.”

Perhaps this is the reason that the American founders tried to limit the power of government.

Funny, when I first looked at the sketch, I saw the front left face as curved (and extending the lines would result in a flat vertical surface at the top that spirals upward).