MD87

... also some parts are Apache, and the wording around the AGPL bit is very weird:

> ... licensed to use source code to create compiled versions ...

Why's it calling out compiling specifically? Are they trying to imply you can't modify/distribute/etc the source? Presumably that would be a "further restriction" per the AGPL and hence ignorable, but it's sloppy at best and misleading at worse, which isn't great for a license document...

The bug is somewhat interesting.

The entire "Gradual recovery" part of the post makes absolutely no sense, and is presumably an LLM fabrication. That's just... not how anything works. And deploying three different weird little mitigations flies in the face of the earlier "We couldn't just restart production. Too many active users."

I totally get how LLMs can help you write, especially in the collaborative way described. But as a reader do I actually want to read that? Maybe for documentation or something it's fine, but if you're trying to convey an opinion or make a human connection it feels a bit... cheap?

The difference is that `ls` is specified in POSIX and everyone has roughly the same expectations of what it does.

Nothing specifies what a binary called `sl` does. The user didn't "overwrite" anything. They just had an `sl` binary that was not the `sl` binary Jest expects. Arguably they had the more commonly known binary with that name.

> I need to think about this, but for sure the clues will be refined to encourage this. Right now, there are only a couple of types of clues and they don't feel very organic.

Yes, with some more varied clues I can see how it could be very fun. Maybe an extra type of clue could be associating suspects with potential murder weapons (e.g. "Alice said she never touched the rope" or "Forensic testing found traces of Bob's DNA on the poison bottle").

Or maybe another type could be like: "Alice heard someone in the bedroom when she was in the kitchen at 09:30". In the right circumstances that could give you _just_ enough information to deduce something.

I'm looking forward to see where you take it! :)

It's a cool idea but it fell a bit flat for me.

> However, it's important to note that every clue you view will have an impact on your overall score. Exercise caution and strategic thinking as you navigate through the evidence and interrogate the suspects to piece together the ultimate solution.

That sounds great! But what actually happened was I clicked through clue after clue about person X being in room Y at time Z until I eventually got told what the murder weapon wasn't three times in a row. I didn't feel like I could exercise any caution or strategic thinking; it was just "Nope, this isn't enough information" over and over until "Yes, this is now enough information".

At the point where I thought I had enough information, I realised I hadn't been consistent in how exactly I was using the notebook: does a tick in the "9:15" box means "They entered at 9:15" or "They left at 9:15"? The boxes really need to correspond to the times they're in the rooms, rather than the instants they move between (so either labelled with a range: 9:00-9:15, 9:15-9:30, or move the labels so they sit in the gaps in between).

Also the "How to Play" link isn't openable in a new tab (because it's handled by javascript), and if you open it normally and go back to the main page you lose all your progress

But you can also say: "Do you know what 11:59PM means? 12:00PM is one minute after that"

Midday and midnight are the points at which AM/PM change and you can't logically differentiate them by appending AM or PM. You just have to know the arbitrary cultural convention that midday is PM.

So the "Terms of Service & Privacy" link doesn't work, and apparently it's a paid subscription service but you don't find that out until you've signed up and tried activating an API key?

I'm sure these are just oversights but it leaves a very bad taste in my mouth!