HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | 331c8c71's commentslogin

It does not pay into EU budget - it contributes to and participates in specific programs and projects. The treaties are rather sectoral agreements which are always under the threat of swiss direct democracy. Bilaterals III has not yet been approved neither by the referendum nor the parliament - while it will likely pass the opposition is every significant.

That's an understatement...

I have heard at least for some cancers the risk actually lowers when you become old enough (because your cells become less active in general).

I was thinking that I actually use grocery shopping as a recovery activity. I could cut it out but don't feel the need that much. It's not that I feel I'd do something incredible instead (which requires energy and/or recovery time of its own)...

Bought a travel click by Braun a few years bact to put next to me when I work. The quality is abysmal, the hour arm is half to a full hour ahead after I used for a while. And it costs like 30 bucks I guess one just pays for the brand name while the product is the same quality as no-name ones on aliexpress for a tenth of the price.


What you really pay for in a Braun is the silent mechanical movement, no tick-tock to keep you awake at night. But while the movement is still allegedly made in Germany, the quality has gone downhill, as you point out. I had some Kienzle and Braun clocks in the 90s that were extremely good, but the new ones made under license, not so much.


The older ones are solid. A tale as old as 1990s corporate decline

I bought a casio, it's been great.


He always striked as genuinely nice person generously sharing knowledge insights etc and not caring particularly about money and status. The difference with the loudest tech bros who now dominate the field is staggering.

So all you did is just illustrated above.


Looks like he developed the original on his employer's equipment during work hours.

And the copyright on tetris pieces is just ridiculous given the Colomb's publication and probably others.

I personally appreciated the write-up as it presents an alternative to the glossed up candy narrative that I have read and seen more than once.

Didn't know about Gerasimov either (who single-handedly coded up the DOS version it seems).


Gerasimov wrote his own account of the Tetris story here: https://vadim.oversigma.com/Tetris.htm

> Contrary to the claim attributed to Henk Rogers there were no "straightforward business arrangement" between Pajitnov and myself. In the Soviet Union, where private business was outlawed and the concept of intellectual property was not defined, people could not make private business arrangements of this kind. The Computer Center of Academy of Sciences owned everything we made. Several years later the situation in the Soviet Union changed, but this was a different story. When I worked on Tetris, even a government organization could not formally hire me because I was underage. I worked on Tetris just for fun. I don't remember Pajitnov ever paying me for anything related to Tetris either. Pajitnov started fixing the business aspects of the situation a few years later when he and Henk Rogers participated in negotiations with Elorg (the only government organization in the USSR that could sell software abroad). Pajitnov stopped by my home and asked me to urgently sign a paper "to get lots of money for us from game companies". He didn't leave me a copy of the paper. As far as I remember the paper was saying that I agree to only claim porting Tetris to the PC, agree to give Pajitnov the right to handle all business arrangements, and refuse any rewards related to Tetris. I did not entirely agree with the content, but I trusted Alexey and signed the paper anyway. In a few months my name disappeared from all newly released versions of Tetris and all Tetris-related documents. Alexey registered a US copyright (R/N PA-412-170) referencing the free PC version of Tetris (original version 3.12) we developed together.


Happy he had a great career regardless!


Oh sure, I don’t necessarily disagree at all. I was mostly hoping for more detail in why - was the original court’s decision that the game’s production as work material or work hours wasn’t valid because it was in Soviet Union and that was either no longer in existence, or perhaps there was some other line of reasoning. I also think there’s been a tendency to create a bit of a narrative out of the whole situation, and I appreciate another view. I have heard of Gerasimov, you might like this short article (Edit: also linked below and quoted as I was typing this up, sorry) he wrote from I don’t remember how long ago, but I think I’ve read it before. For his part, he seems to feel here that pajitnov cut him out unfairly.

https://vadim.oversigma.com/Tetris.htm


It's worth your time reading and comparing the earliest version of Garasimov's account, as it has been edited over the years under pressure from the other parties involved.

Most notably, when The Tetris Company decided to change the year of creation of Tetris, they requested Garasimov change it on his page, which he confirmed by email to somebody who asked about the reason.

I'm not sure this is the absolute earliest, but you get the idea https://web.archive.org/web/20060821183909/https://vadim.ove...

And the earliest mention I can find of the dates if conception (not creation) is in A Japanese interview from 1989 before the facts started to be changed https://blog.gingerbeardman.com/2025/02/03/tetris-date-of-co...


> In reality most individuals are good people.

I'd agree if we are talking about personal interactions. Few hundreds people that we personally know and interact with is the scale we are wired for by evolution, isn't it?

What civilization enabled and continuously rely on, however, is the type of deindividualization of actions and bucketing of people, which, in turn, enables pretty horrible things at scale (from the weapons of mass destruction to objectively psychopathic profit-maximizing corporations). One can even say that not facing the consequences of one's actions is a feature and not a bug of the system.


Yeah the bureaucracy like eu is almost a perfect setup to deflect responsibility. "Apparently the measures taken by our predecessors were not ideal in hindsight but the need to protect our children remains of utmost importance. With the lessons learned we will now take steps to ensure the bright future for us all!" lol


I think almost everyone threw a dice quite a few times while playing board games.


Maybe people would have a better understanding of percentages if 20-sided dice were used more. "This has a 95% chance to succeed" -> roll a d20, anything but 1 is a success

Meanwhile 6-sided dice don't map to nice numbers, and having two dice makes the maths even harder to intuit


I think 1/2 and 1/3 are quite nice as far as numbers go! Also 2/36 = 0.5555... is not that far from 5%


But (assuming two dice rolled at the same time) 2/36 is something like "roll a five and a six" or "roll either a pair of sixes or a pair of fives". Neither of which is quite as intuitive or commonly used in game design as "using one d20, roll a natural 20"


And yet they struggle with the abstract concept. They'll wonder why the candidate with a projected 20% chance of winning won. They won't know what to do with the information of a 70% chance of rain tomorrow. "Either it will rain or it won't, which is it!" Perhaps it's the frequentist approach that comes more natural than the Bayesian approach, who knows.

This isn't my original thought, by the way. Someone wrote more about it here: https://towardsdatascience.com/humans-are-bad-at-probability...


Nobody understands Bayesian approach. Look at Covid -- people FREAKED out when we updated guidance based on learning new information.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: