15 ms·

After playing Hatetris https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27063894 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27063894 yesterday on HN, I decided I would rather ha

After playing Hatetris https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27063894 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27063894 yesterday on HN, I decided I would rather have the AI on my side so I forked the site and flipped a sign. If your life feels like Hatetris, Lovetris will bring you comfort. Enjoy :)

carl_dr 5y ago
If all you’ve done is flip a sign, it’s a little disingenuous to say “by GistNoesis“.
- indigochill 5y ago
  This version didn't exist until GistNoesis flipped the sign, so no, it's not. This gets to a larger philosophy of open source: we should encourage people to fork when they want to iterate on someone else's work, however minor that iteration may be. This is open source working as intended.
  - learnstats2 5y ago
    The Hatetris code doesn’t appear to have an open source license, or any license, so it isn’t open source. This use of the code is a clear legal breach of copyright, in the absence of specific agreement with the copyright holder. (On the Hatetris page, the author declines someone’s request to use the code elsewhere)
    - Pfhreak 5y ago
      I mean, Hatetris probably wasn't using the Tetris trademarks properly, right? Aren't both just remix culture?
      - simondotau 5y ago
        Morally? I suppose if you squint hard enough. Legally though, just because one person's proprietary work relies upon another person's proprietary work, doesn't mean it suddenly becomes open source or public domain.
        Pfhreak 5y ago
        I'm just surprised the community made the critique on this version but not the other one.
        simondotau 5y ago
        Honestly I’m not surprised. The prior work could be argued as being fair use of the Tetris copyright. It certainly isn’t stealing any market from any official licensed Tetris products or services. Morally, I can find it very easily defensible. This “Lovetris” work is a blatant copying and republishing of someone else’s proprietary work effort with no permission. Morally, I don’t see this as an egregious abuse, but I can see why this community would object to someone not acting in the spirit of open source licensing.
    - Jon_Lowtek 5y ago
      https://github.com/qntm/hatetris/issues/50 https://github.com/qntm/hatetris/issues/50 License: MIT
      - learnstats2 5y ago
        I'm not sure I deserve to be so downvoted for this, considering this clarification came after my comment ;(
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
        haneefmubarak 5y ago
        I didn't downvote you, but I want to clarify what's going on because I know it sucks to get down voted with explanation. The reason you're getting so many down votes is because you made strong claims in a harsh tone that turned out to be false in a trivially verifiable manner. The intent there is that you should've verified your claim through and through before attributing a misdeed to someone who simply sought to share something they thought was cool to make with others.
        learnstats2 5y ago
        I find it important to identify that yes, a license is required to use someone else’s code - I mean this legally, not morally: you can be sued. The sibling points about trademark law (which is different) and remix culture (which has some legal protection but not that I’m aware for lines of code) seem to miss this point. This is a licensed use, it turns out, which is great. If the author here had not identified that before publishing, then they were putting themselves at legal risk. [on a technicality, the MIT license hasn’t been properly invoked, since the MIT license requires the text of the license to be included in full, but the original author’s consent for use seems now to be clear]
  - Grustaf 5y ago
    If you take something that took hours to build and (as is claimed) spend 1 minute modifying it, you absolutely have no right to claim it’s “by” you. I think everyone except you agrees on that.
    - tobr 5y ago
      > I think everyone except you agrees on that As a member of “everyone”, would you please not put words in my mouth.
      - Grustaf 5y ago
        ”I think”
        LocalH 5y ago
        Well, you've been given an example that contradicts your "thinking", so either your "thinking" was unknowingly incorrect, or you now choose to believe something that is patently false.
      - zepolen 5y ago
        Everyone is so touchy.
    - franciscop 5y ago
      Well they also changed the name, so this new concept of Lovetris is by the new author, even if the code to make it possible is not. Lots of references to the old work as well, similar distribution (e.g. not paid), etc. If I was the author of Hatetris I'd be happy for this version!
      - Grustaf 5y ago
        > they also changed the name Is that a serious argument? If you write a techno song, and I take it, turn up the BPM and publish it as “by me”, would it help my case that I also changed the name of the song?
yeahboats 5y ago
In a way, I got just as frustrated (well maybe not _as_ frustrated) as playing hatetris, because I couldn't easily make 4 line combos. That is, until I managed to set up endless straight pieces and stack the rest of the board save that one slot.
electroly 5y ago
Very nice! My initial reaction is: it's not giving me the piece I want. It's trying to force you to clear individual lines as soon as it is possible to do so. But in real Tetris, you want to clear four lines at a time to get double score, which may mean withholding a line clear when you could have done one. Consider this replay: హටເח௨ඞܗТۑටܢݹ௫੬ຽߢ௧ලບঅযلЈǶ It ends by giving me nothing but S pieces, because it wants me to take the single line clear. It won't stop giving S pieces until I do so. In actuality, any other piece would be preferable; there are available spots for all of them, and I can build up to a Tetris. But with the S piece, my only options are to sacrifice the Tetris for the single line clear, or create a hole in my stack.
- andai 5y ago
  Tetris(Noun) The act of clearing four lines at once (the maximum possible) in Tetris. Somehow went my entire life not knowing that meaning of the word!
  - input_sh 5y ago
    It depends on the implementation of course, but clearing 4 lines at once usually brings a huge amount of points. For example, NES version at the first "level" (slowest speed): 1 line = 40, 2 lines = 100, 3 lines = 300, 4 lines = 1200. It also increases the speed every 10 lines, so you want to plan accordingly for maximum score. You can get above that first level with either 400 points or 3600. If you have some time to kill, highly recommend this and the follow up video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RaqVGzhQTM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RaqVGzhQTM
    - stormbrew 5y ago
      In modern ("guideline") tetris T-spins multiline clears tend to actually be the most point-garnering moves. It's a bit weird that the game named tetris went that way but oh well.
  - tome 5y ago
    "Tetris" as in "tetrahedron". mind.equals(blown).
djmips 5y ago
I think to make this a fun-ish experience would be to have the screen start filled with mostly garbage and holes and then have the the 'AI' lovingly send you the appropriate pieces to clean up the mess... I tried this by purposely messing the board and then going ahead with the game and I found it quite pleasant. Another idea would be to have it 'normal' until you got in trouble and then it would lovetris you back to health.
IshKebab 5y ago
I don't think you need AI to decide the best piece. Or any logic at all. It's just always the long piece. Pretty boring. Might be more interesting if there were other constraints like it couldn't give you the same piece too often or something.

carl_dr 5y ago

If all you’ve done is flip a sign, it’s a little disingenuous to say “by GistNoesis“.

indigochill 5y ago
This version didn't exist until GistNoesis flipped the sign, so no, it's not. This gets to a larger philosophy of open source: we should encourage people to fork when they want to iterate on someone else's work, however minor that iteration may be. This is open source working as intended.
- learnstats2 5y ago
  The Hatetris code doesn’t appear to have an open source license, or any license, so it isn’t open source. This use of the code is a clear legal breach of copyright, in the absence of specific agreement with the copyright holder. (On the Hatetris page, the author declines someone’s request to use the code elsewhere)
  - Pfhreak 5y ago
    I mean, Hatetris probably wasn't using the Tetris trademarks properly, right? Aren't both just remix culture?
    - simondotau 5y ago
      Morally? I suppose if you squint hard enough. Legally though, just because one person's proprietary work relies upon another person's proprietary work, doesn't mean it suddenly becomes open source or public domain.
      - Pfhreak 5y ago
        I'm just surprised the community made the critique on this version but not the other one.
        simondotau 5y ago
        Honestly I’m not surprised. The prior work could be argued as being fair use of the Tetris copyright. It certainly isn’t stealing any market from any official licensed Tetris products or services. Morally, I can find it very easily defensible. This “Lovetris” work is a blatant copying and republishing of someone else’s proprietary work effort with no permission. Morally, I don’t see this as an egregious abuse, but I can see why this community would object to someone not acting in the spirit of open source licensing.
  - Jon_Lowtek 5y ago
    https://github.com/qntm/hatetris/issues/50 https://github.com/qntm/hatetris/issues/50 License: MIT
    - learnstats2 5y ago
      I'm not sure I deserve to be so downvoted for this, considering this clarification came after my comment ;(
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - haneefmubarak 5y ago
        I didn't downvote you, but I want to clarify what's going on because I know it sucks to get down voted with explanation. The reason you're getting so many down votes is because you made strong claims in a harsh tone that turned out to be false in a trivially verifiable manner. The intent there is that you should've verified your claim through and through before attributing a misdeed to someone who simply sought to share something they thought was cool to make with others.
        learnstats2 5y ago
        I find it important to identify that yes, a license is required to use someone else’s code - I mean this legally, not morally: you can be sued. The sibling points about trademark law (which is different) and remix culture (which has some legal protection but not that I’m aware for lines of code) seem to miss this point. This is a licensed use, it turns out, which is great. If the author here had not identified that before publishing, then they were putting themselves at legal risk. [on a technicality, the MIT license hasn’t been properly invoked, since the MIT license requires the text of the license to be included in full, but the original author’s consent for use seems now to be clear]
- Grustaf 5y ago
  If you take something that took hours to build and (as is claimed) spend 1 minute modifying it, you absolutely have no right to claim it’s “by” you. I think everyone except you agrees on that.
  - tobr 5y ago
    > I think everyone except you agrees on that As a member of “everyone”, would you please not put words in my mouth.
    - Grustaf 5y ago
      ”I think”
      - LocalH 5y ago
        Well, you've been given an example that contradicts your "thinking", so either your "thinking" was unknowingly incorrect, or you now choose to believe something that is patently false.
    - zepolen 5y ago
      Everyone is so touchy.
  - franciscop 5y ago
    Well they also changed the name, so this new concept of Lovetris is by the new author, even if the code to make it possible is not. Lots of references to the old work as well, similar distribution (e.g. not paid), etc. If I was the author of Hatetris I'd be happy for this version!
    - Grustaf 5y ago
      > they also changed the name Is that a serious argument? If you write a techno song, and I take it, turn up the BPM and publish it as “by me”, would it help my case that I also changed the name of the song?

yeahboats 5y ago

In a way, I got just as frustrated (well maybe not _as_ frustrated) as playing hatetris, because I couldn't easily make 4 line combos. That is, until I managed to set up endless straight pieces and stack the rest of the board save that one slot.

electroly 5y ago

Very nice! My initial reaction is: it's not giving me the piece I want. It's trying to force you to clear individual lines as soon as it is possible to do so. But in real Tetris, you want to clear four lines at a time to get double score, which may mean withholding a line clear when you could have done one. Consider this replay: హටເח௨ඞܗТۑටܢݹ௫੬ຽߢ௧ලບঅযلЈǶ It ends by giving me nothing but S pieces, because it wants me to take the single line clear. It won't stop giving S pieces until I do so. In actuality, any other piece would be preferable; there are available spots for all of them, and I can build up to a Tetris. But with the S piece, my only options are to sacrifice the Tetris for the single line clear, or create a hole in my stack.

andai 5y ago
Tetris(Noun) The act of clearing four lines at once (the maximum possible) in Tetris. Somehow went my entire life not knowing that meaning of the word!
- input_sh 5y ago
  It depends on the implementation of course, but clearing 4 lines at once usually brings a huge amount of points. For example, NES version at the first "level" (slowest speed): 1 line = 40, 2 lines = 100, 3 lines = 300, 4 lines = 1200. It also increases the speed every 10 lines, so you want to plan accordingly for maximum score. You can get above that first level with either 400 points or 3600. If you have some time to kill, highly recommend this and the follow up video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RaqVGzhQTM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RaqVGzhQTM
  - stormbrew 5y ago
    In modern ("guideline") tetris T-spins multiline clears tend to actually be the most point-garnering moves. It's a bit weird that the game named tetris went that way but oh well.
- tome 5y ago
  "Tetris" as in "tetrahedron". mind.equals(blown).

djmips 5y ago

I think to make this a fun-ish experience would be to have the screen start filled with mostly garbage and holes and then have the the 'AI' lovingly send you the appropriate pieces to clean up the mess... I tried this by purposely messing the board and then going ahead with the game and I found it quite pleasant. Another idea would be to have it 'normal' until you got in trouble and then it would lovetris you back to health.

IshKebab 5y ago

I don't think you need AI to decide the best piece. Or any logic at all. It's just always the long piece. Pretty boring. Might be more interesting if there were other constraints like it couldn't give you the same piece too often or something.