HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | g-b-r's commentslogin

If you mean point and click game, I liked Sam & Max hit the road more

Adventure games are games that are spiritual ancestors to the game Colossal Cave Adventure (often just called Adventure), which includes most point and clicks, but also the likes of Zork and Myst.

It's very often misused though, I think from people confusing the label as referring to games being about an adventure, rather than being like the game Adventure.


I never heard that the Adventure term came from Colossal Cave Adventure, really ? It's true that it is/was the other term commonly used for this kind of games, anyhow.

Myst was better categorized as a puzzle game, you wouldn't recommend it to someone looking for games similar to Monkey Island


It's a well established term, and puzzle games like Myst are generally considered a subgrenre: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adventure_game

On the magazines I used to read Adventure was a synonymous of Point and Click.

I definitely don't trust Wikipedia on these kind of things, anyhow it could be that the terms were different in different countries or just different magazines


Oh, you're Marginalia's developer, congratulations :)

Thanks, I guess :P

I followed Pixel prices for the last year, and rock-bottom for a 256gb version (the current absolute minimum for a device without an sd, to my eyes) meant 450€.

There are occasional good deals for (unused) older models on eBay, but they're surprisingly rare.

I wonder if Google demands stores to give the old models back, after the release of newer ones; they disappear from every store extremely quickly.


Interesting, here you can still buy the P10 and P10P for hundreds of Euros off and the prices are still trending down. Also many stores still have them. This is not surprising, because Google still sells them themselves, just in fewer colors and storage tiers.

Yeah, the 10 are still sold, but hundreds off, so at what price they're sold?


> a device that holds your entire life, bank info, photos, etc

That device was called personal computer for decades, and the world didn't end for the simplicity of installing software on it.


The difference is that the only people who used those personal computers were (are) an educated subset of the middle class in developed countries.

No. Plenty of people with no technical knowledge.

Today people get in debt to have the latest orange iPhone, for a long time before that most people in, ok, developed countries somehow got hold of a computer.

Maybe with less brain cells burned by


I somehow forgot that last sentence there, apologies

That hasn't been true since September 1993.

It was true then and it is true now. Outside businesspeople and students and the middle class of OECD countries (all amounting to a low single-digit percentage of the world population), ordinary people never bought desktop or laptop computers. By contrast, everyone has a mobile one in their pocket today.

That's just false

More likely you're living in a bubble unrepresentative of the rest of the world. I just did some research, inconclusive because nobody is tracking this data. Personal-computer ownership in rich countries (i.e. "OECD") is indeed high. But only 12% of the world's population lives in Europe and North America combined. The figure is much much lower elsewhere in the world, where everyone lives. For example, 16 computers per 100 people in Brazil in the 2010s. [1] Most people in the world have never touched a laptop or desktop. Now that computing has gone mobile-first, the figure is only going to keep dropping.

[1] https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/computers...


> That device was called personal computer

To be fair, mobile phones being locked down probably contributed to the mass adoption of e.g. mobile payments and banking.


Web banking was offered by all banks long before banking apps, and you could of course access it from smartphones

The move to apps made things more difficult, if anything


Offered but less broadly adopted. Having a platform that doesn't tend to get infected when used by normal users helped with that.

It was adopted by everyone I knew

And they used an actually secure OTP dongle, eventually ditched by most banks because, yeah SMS codes and apps are safer............

It's now that a lot of people can't use any remote banking, because their bank's app is huge or refuses to run on their phone.


> And they used an actually secure OTP dongle, eventually ditched by most banks because, yeah SMS codes and apps are safer............

The EU mandates the 2FA method shows information about the purchase you're authenticating (timestamp, amount and cc used in my case), making unconnected dongles impossible to use. This makes me sad, but it does have merit.

FWIW I still use the website to do all my payments. I find banking apps to be madness - you're entrusting all your money to what is essentially a toy.


> The EU mandates the 2FA method shows information about the purchase you're authenticating (timestamp, amount and cc used in my case), making unconnected dongles impossible to use.

There are unconnected photoTAN devices that support this. They have a camera that reads a QR code. Some European banks use this. E.g. Vasco digipass 770


Yeah, compared to separate hardware HSMs mobile banking is a massive downgrade in both security as well as user being in control of the hardware they own (by forcing locked down closer source OS & forcing hardware updates).

If mobile banking really wanted to be secure, they would support something like a NFC yubikey for transaction verification. The fact they fully ignore separate secure HSMs tells you what you need to know about their security.


The world may not of ended but to of people have been hurt by malware ruining their computer, cryptolocking all of their company's files for ransom, stealing all of your login credentials, stealing cryptocurrency, taking secret photos with your webcam, screen recording what you are doing on your computer, etc.

The "personal computer" has a terrible track record.


For many decades, people have been mistakenly putting diesel fuel into their gasoline cars, yet we never outlawed diesel vehicles. You can only do so much to protect people without destroying their rights to their property.

Society moved to having it so diesel fuel pump would not fit into gasoline cars.

Society didn't ban doing it, but put up barriers that help the average person from doing something dangerous.


The slight difference is that no one in their right mind would ever want to put diesel in a gasoline car

I think the pumps still fit where I live, btw


Rent or borrow a vehicle, and mistakenly fill it up according to habit. It's an easy mistake to make.

Making the nozzle shapes incompatible is a smart solution, but in the US at least I'm pretty sure they're interchangeable.


the pump handles are green tho

Many people are partially color blind, with IIRC most people having issues with properly seeing the green color.

Just like people get robbed, it is as common as that.

It doesn't mean one can't buy nice things because one is afraid of being robbed.


Except a sane society puts rules in place against robbers and then bans such people from society.

There have already been laws against scammers and hackers for a long time.

There are such laws already, what ragequittah was proposing (and Google implementing) is handcuffing people that are not robbers.

More like an alarm that deters (though not always) the robbers. You can still very easily sideload apps.

That seems to happen on phones too

It is much rarer since it needs 0 day to do these at the same level as possible on a pc. The play store scanning apps for malware is an important safety mechanism against this. Further more imposter apps like YouTube but with no ads that are Trojans that steal people's accounts.

Or the accessibility permission, or to some degree the access all files ones; but it's also enough for the app to pilfer the data you trust it with.

The Play Store's scanning is very far from perfect, and the amount of crap that's on it, combined with the trust that people have towards it, and apps' unfettered access to internet, makes malicious software easily more common than on PCs.

Even without considering as malicious the enormous data collection that almost everything on the Play Store does, encouraged by Google


If the money was guaranteed to only be used to pay the costs, there probably wouldn't be any problems


No. What happened to their remote library scheme? They did not make if for profit, but still...


A whole bunch of assumptions and beliefs passed off for truths.

LLMs have very little to do with engineering, unless you let a pair of dice decide how you build a house.

Cars are not built by AIs, they're built by extremely precise robots, over precise instructions.

I'd VERY much want a hand-made car over an LLM-made car, thank you.

Because I do want the precision, reliability and performance that an LLM-made car won't ever be able to guarantee.


Cars use AI for steering control (et al) and technology very similar to RLVR (hold the RL), eg property-based testing and formal verification, to prove the soundness of their embedded systems. Most of us in San Francisco trust Waymo with our lives more than human uber/Lyft drivers

As long as you can verify/test and take accountability for the thing you put your name on there’s no reason not to treat it as a process or search problem rather than one you assemble yourself by hand. The only problem is that it’s ironically much harder and more engineering than most “software engineers” are willing or able to do.

I spent several years working on permutation testing/experimentation and creating e2e verification of infrastructure because at scale, or when reliability/correctness are critical, you cannot rely on a single person’s mental model, or for the world to not drift around a system as it works now. That kind of system is what allows you to use LLMs or engineers who don’t know everything about it to improve or change it. It’s more science than art, which is often (but not always) what you want


You mean by vibecoding? Don't call that programming, for God's sake


If yoyohello13 says so it must be true


Truer words have never been spoken.


It freezes a Pixel 10 on Chrome, Webviews and Brave..!

I tried several webview-based browsers, Chrome, and Brave, with them the phone completely freezes (except that the audio keeps going for a bit).

I tested webview browsers because by chance the first place I ran it on was Telegram's internal browser (on which the phone does freeze).

It doesn't do anything on Firefox though, and weirdly enough not even on the Chromium-based Cromite (after enabling WebGL).

I only tried waiting for a few minutes, but it wasn't giving signs of life.

If someone wants to try, keep in mind that to force restart a Pixel you have to press the power button for 30 seconds (during which you might break out in a cold sweat).


Pixel 9 Pro with Brave, it just sort of freezes for a second or two before I can close the tab using the normal brave button.

Wonder what made the difference. I must've disabled some shady JS attack surface at some point.


Pixel 9s are very different from Pixel 10s, in any case


pixel 9 fold with Graphene, nothing significant in vanadium (after manually enabling JS)


You can obtain a cryptographic proof by recording the tls exchange, including the keys

You need to use a tls intercepting proxy for that.

I couldn't find any ready-made tool unfortunately, there's tlsnotary.org but it seems far from simple.


So basically I record what the browser sends to the server when I click the toggle and the server response?

I wonder how I can attach a timestamp that cannot be faked.


If you have the TLS session with all the keys, that's signed with the server's key, so it's basically certified by them themselves.

They could only claim that it's been faked by claiming that you stole their TLS private key.


Look into court-grade eDiscovery Software.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_discovery

Specifically forensic web preservation or web capture tools.

PS: If they made it impossible for you to prove that you clicked a checkbox or not, then, logically, the burden of proof is on THEM.


That Wikipedia article seems to have no bearing on the issue; there's not even any log on a normal user's computer of having or not having clicked a checkbox.

> If they made it impossible for you to prove that you clicked a checkbox or not, then, logically, the burden of proof is on THEM

Even in Europe the only "proof" that's required to companies is a log or database entry (both easily manipulated); if a user strongly disputed to have done it and sued the company for that, maybe you'd able to obtain some investigation on their systems.


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

Search: