My wife missed that word, and it said the correct word was “habit”.
I also did “baith” (for the same reason as OP), and ended up making it to 16, but I feel like I shouldn’t have, since I’ve never heard of “baith”. I was confused when it accepted it.
Shuffle would certainly help with that. I felt like I was expending a ton of energy and time shuffling mentally (but I'll concede that if I did it enough I'd get faster at it).
Ceterum censeo, anyone thinking to create an authoring system for IF should first read the Inform DM4 [0], preferably in its entirety but at the very minimum §24 of Chapter 3. It’s really enlightening to learn about how to model the world in a general yet simple way.
Loreline isn't aimed at parser-based interactive fiction like Inform, it's a choice-based narrative scripting language, closer to Ink or Yarn Spinner. DM4 solves a different kind of problem.
Edit: that said, you're right this §24 is interesting regardless!
I’ve been perusing Bubbles increasingly often since discovering that my blog is syndicated there, a few weeks ago.
It feels really refreshing compared to doomscrolling of social media, or indeed even to HN. It’s so diverse and humane. The indie blogosphere is coming to life.
Kudos to the author. A great idea, splendidly executed. I hope it grows and doesn’t change much.
From memory, there was a long tail of blogs like that way back when, but a core of solid, interesting content. I have an expectation that an aggregator would bubble the interesting stuff up, and the self-referential stuff down. But maybe this is just content the audience finds interesting.
There is still solid and interesting content, it’s just that the material is so diverse that attention is spread thinly. Meanwhile, blogging is the one thing bloggers definitely have in common, so the attention is more concentrated.
It’s a failing of aggregators that they optimize for attention concentration rather than interestingness. But is there even such a thing, objectively?
> attention concentration rather than interestingness
With sufficiently rich data, I think they're equivalent.
I think collaborative filtering works much better once you have a critical mass of users/data - enough that taste clusters emerge. Otherwise it just defaults to whatever's globally popular. Google Reader managed it quite well. Librarything is fantastic at it (far better than Amazon).
I wrote a simple recommendation engine for musical taste in the early 2k's (pre-last.fm), but it had very little data available to it. The result? It recommended Radiohead to everyone. (Looking back, this was my first exposure to The Bitter Lesson).
The post (after reading it) is not political in the today sense. It’s connecting an in vogue concept to toxic thought patterns and notes a correlation in both the patterns and trending association of some influencers to a specific political segment.
The point the author is trying to cover is that a lifestyle and aesthetic the author naturally aligns with actually actively excludes her - and that pattern is seen elsewhere and (author opinion) has wider implications.
I’d argue it’s a fair and not a political statement (there is some text that indicates the preference of the author) but a human realizing and sharing their exclusion from a group and that the exclusion expands into (again, author perspective) defined categories of people. Talking about thoughts and opinions is… what I expect from a blog.
LLMs might be part of why Ladybird is making this decision, but they aren’t the only possible one: SQLite, for example, has been developed this way pretty much forever. To each their own, I guess.
Yeah I don't see the big deal here. Some of the best software is made and maintained by a very small group of dedicated folks. It's a perfectly reasonable move to protect their time and project.
OP here. See [0] – for this post, I’ve moved from PNGs to SVGs and found an easier way to determine link coordinates, but otherwise the process is mostly the same.
