• 0 Posts
  • 27 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: September 27th, 2023

help-circle

  • Sure. You have to solve it from inside out:

    • not()…See comment below for this one, I was tricked is a base function that negates what’s inside (turning True to False and vice versa) giving it no parameter returns “True” (because no parameter counts as False)
    • str(x) turns x into a string, in this case it turns the boolean True into the text string ‘True’
    • min(x) returns the minimal element of an iterable. In this case the character ‘T’ because capital letters come before non-capital letters, otherwise it would return ‘e’ (I’m not entirely sure if it uses unicode, ascii or something else to compare characters, but usually capitals have a lower value than non-capitals and otherwise in alphabetical order ascending)
    • ord(x) returns the unicode number of x, in this case turning ‘T’ into the integer 84
    • range(x) creates an iterable from 0 to x (non-inclusive), in this case you can think of it as the list [0, 1, 2, …82, 83] (it’s technically an object of type range but details…)
    • sum(x) sums up all elements of a list, summing all numbers between 0 and 84 (non-inclusive) is 3486
    • chr(x) is the inverse of ord(x) and returns the character at position x, which, you guessed it, is ‘ඞ’ at position 3486.

    The huge coincidental part is that ඞ lies at a position that can be reached by a cumulative sum of integers between 0 and a given integer. From there on it’s only a question of finding a way to feed that integer into chr(sum(range(x)))



  • after leaving can’t join another for a year

    Can you fix this? There was enough misinformation floating around about this already when this feature went into beta.

    Adults can leave a family at any time, however, they will need to wait 1 year from when they joined the previous family to create or join a new family.

    it should say something like: “After joining, can’t join another for a year”



  • When were talking about teaching kids the alphabet we need to train both individual and applied letters

    This is only slightly related but I once met a young (USAmerican) adult who thought the stripy horse animal’s name was pronounced zed-bra in British English and it was really hard to convince her otherwise. In her mind zebra was strongly connected to Z-bra, so of course if someone was to pronounce the letter “zed” it would turn into “zed-bra” and not just into “zeh-bra”.




  • I hope you’re right because this article says they used a spray can.

    Which brings me back to the last point in my comment.

    I also hope I’m right. The two times I looked into it (right after the attack and before writing my comment) both came up with that result. Also it seems that English Heritage came out today saying there was “No visible damage”.

    As I said, I’m not writing to defend the action, just pointing out that the OP article is, willfully or not, omitting certain aspects that could make JSO look a little bit better.

    Edit: Formatting


  • but we did damage a 5000-year-old monument

    As far as I could find out, they used orange cornflour that will just wash off the next time it rains. The most amount of damage anyone could seriously bring up was that it could harm/displace the lichen on the henge.

    That’s not to say that I specifically condone the action, but it’s a lot less bad than this article makes it sound. It’s the same with the soup attack on one of van Gogh’s painting, which had protective glass on it. So far all the JSO actions targeting cultural/historical things (at least the ones that made it to the big news) have been done in a way that makes them sound awful at first hearing, but intentionally did not actually damage the targeted cultural/historical thing.

    I think the biases of the journalist/news outlet/etc. are somewhat exposed by which parts they focus on and which they downplay or omit entirely.


  • I can only speak for myself. For me it felt really great being able to explore the world having absolutely zero idea of what is what, how much game is left, etc. It is reminiscent of a time when I was a kid and playing a game was exactly like that.

    I even got quite sad when my friend “accidentally” told me

    spoiler

    That a certain action I did locked me into a specific ending unless I did something I probably wouldn’t be able to figure out. Rationally I understand that this is as inconsequential as it gets, but I didn’t even know for sure if there were multiple endings until that point.







  • There are quite a few other roguelike (or roguelike adjacient) games that do beat it handily. To give a few examples:

    DF started development in October 2002 (according to their own website, scroll all the way down.)

    UnReal World’s first release was in 1992 and is also still getting regular updates.

    NetHack has gotten new versions ever since 1987. The latest big change was 3.6.0 in 2015, 3.6.7 came out in early 2023 but there’s no reason to believe there won’t be a next version. If we count that in 1987 it started as a fork of Hack, we could even add another 3 years in the front as Hack was published in 1984.

    Edit: I just realized: In the world of MMORPGs we also have a few examples: Everquest which came out in 2000 and is still getting expansions. Even WoW isn’t too far behind with a 2004 release date, which probably means development began before DF’s development too.




  • I think the humor is meant to be in the juxtaposition between “reference” in media contexts (e.g. “I am your father”) and “reference” in programming contexts and applying the latter context to the former one.

    What does “I’m your father” mean if the movie is jaws?

    I think the absurdity of that question is part of said humor. That being said, I didn’t find it funny either.