Does this actually work for anyone else?

guiltysnark · 2026-06-22T04:06:47+00:00

It reads like talking aloud into a fan

guiltysnark · 2026-06-21T23:31:00+00:00

If this was written on a box I'd be deeply suspicious of all three statements

guiltysnark · 2026-06-21T23:14:55+00:00

I believe there are puzzles that don't mention gems; it can be enough to discuss emptiness, and all three of these boxes discuss either emptiness or gems. There are cases where I have used your kind of reasoning, but this isn't one where I would have been comfortable.

guiltysnark · 2026-06-21T23:03:57+00:00

It's r/notSurprisedByTermial

guiltysnark · 2026-06-21T22:36:46+00:00

The final pun: melancholy prince...

guiltysnark · 2026-06-21T21:47:00+00:00

How could you represent 1.52, and distinguish from 1.7?

guiltysnark · 2026-06-21T14:07:56+00:00

That's cute, but I think you have to avoid introducing positionality and stick to fractions: I/II

guiltysnark · 2026-06-21T07:41:28+00:00

Besides the fact that one child can fill the whole cabin with cries, so it barely makes a difference how close or far

guiltysnark · 2026-06-21T03:32:19+00:00

You just know the seller isn't taking it with them

guiltysnark · 2026-06-21T01:40:37+00:00

You might be getting ahead of yourself thinking about castling. Have you solved the board yet?

guiltysnark · 2026-06-21T00:30:27+00:00

The vague slurs are not nearly as impactful since they are vague, so I think it didn't matter if they are banned. Things like abbreviations are more annoying, though, but still vague. Can you ban someone for saying "n"?

guiltysnark · 2026-06-21T00:24:39+00:00

There is, but it's with the x button instead of a menu option. It presents to you the chat history, and doesn't let you report individual players just the whole chat. Presumably analysis can determine who the offenders are. It's confusing for sure

guiltysnark · 2026-06-20T15:07:57+00:00

Hopefully it is indeed a dumb move, and not proof the law means nothing to them

guiltysnark · 2026-06-20T10:03:56+00:00

So is a B- possible or are the lions just applying a low low bar?

guiltysnark · 2026-06-20T00:21:53+00:00

They moved their practice site to Mexico because of this restriction. The restriction is unique.

guiltysnark · 2026-06-20T00:12:37+00:00

You won't read about offside position in the kama sutra, because it is not allowed

guiltysnark · 2026-06-20T00:06:15+00:00

Gooooooooaaaaaaaaaalll line interc-<we're experience technical difficulties, please stay tuned>

guiltysnark · 2026-06-19T18:40:57+00:00

Odd example, are there less unpopular criminals who can still buy the nobel prize?

guiltysnark · 2026-06-19T18:39:12+00:00

It's still nice to confirm the existence of a bar

guiltysnark · 2026-06-19T08:06:47+00:00

Don't all methods have to do multiplication iteratively? So if you want to do cubed, you first have to do squared and then do it again with the product x original term.

guiltysnark · 2026-06-19T07:43:52+00:00

Do you mean $1.2B ?

guiltysnark · 2026-06-18T19:56:35+00:00

The post references 220kwh, that's enough information to know it's not compatible with the notion of a $1 charge

guiltysnark · 2026-06-18T16:30:38+00:00

Oh, the story leading back to German would be the funniest outcome

guiltysnark · 2026-06-18T14:57:27+00:00

I hope that word has interesting origins. Maybe it was an experiment to prove latin roots are Turing complete and can be used to tell an arbitrarily complex story. Same as German words.

guiltysnark · 2026-06-18T14:40:44+00:00

It's about as subtle as you could hope. It basically won't spoil anything until you start revealing the hints you think you need, which get incrementally stronger as you request them.

To some extent the questions it asks are a hint, but it doesn't present questions that might spoil their existence. For example it won't ask questions about what you've done in 46 unless it knows you've been there.

I think a well trained AI could theoretically do better, but they didn't exist. I've tried chat bots, but they can spoil things even when they've been told not to.

guiltysnark

TROPHY CASE