4 ms·
Amusingly, Chen's article refers to the Wikipedia page as evidence that Tony Krueger did the port. The article's evidence for that in its latest version? A link
by tom_ 4mo ago
Amusingly, Chen's article refers to the Wikipedia page as evidence that Tony Krueger did the port. The article's evidence for that in its latest version? A link back to Chen's article...!
- 1f60c 4mo agoWait, that's illegal.
- dhosek 4mo agoThere’s an xkcd for that but I’m on my phone and too lazy to look it up.
- Feathercrown 4mo agoCitogenesis! https://xkcd.com/978/ https://xkcd.com/978/ Can't believe we got to see one in the wild, and with clear attribution to boot.
- anothermoron 4mo ago[dead]
- andrybak 4mo agoin addition to a relevant xkcd, there is also a Wikipedia article about the phenomenon and a behind-the-scenes list - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reporting#On_Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reporting#On_Wikipedi... - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_citogenesis_incidents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_citogenesis_... - previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35535407 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35535407
- thunderbong 4mo agoMobile version https://m.xkcd.com/978/ https://m.xkcd.com/978/
- disillusioned 4mo agoI have left comments on HN and Reddit and then found them rolled into Google's AI search summarizer OR the knowledge box with _extreme rapidity_ such that when I went, mere moments later, to go re-check some fact I had cited, I found my own comment at the top of the results, repeated back to me, but with authority and gravitas, ensconced in the austere trappings of the knowledge box.
- jibal 4mo agoBut that didn't happen. See comments above by svat, snickerbockers, and InsideOutSanta.
- snickerbockers 4mo agoFWIW, the citation to Raymond Chen's blog is specifically in relation to the claim that it was reverse engineered from the MS-DOS port due to the source code being unavailable. Prior to the edit there was a citation to the game itself for both Tony and Ed Halley as the game's development but the guy who added in the reverse engineering anecdote from chen's blog split the sentence so that the citation for the names of the game's developers is only applied to the other guy. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chip%27s_Challenge&diff=1360654780&oldid=1359630923 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chip%27s_Challeng...
- svat 4mo agoTo make the chronology clear: • The Wikipedia page from before the reference to Chen's article was added: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chip%27s_Challenge&oldid=1359630923 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chip%27s_Challeng... — it cites two sources for "coded by Tony Krueger" ("About box from the game") and for "written [by Krueger] in a single summer" (a forum post). • Chen's article mentions "Tony Krueger is remembered in Wikipedia as the person who ported…", then adds a footnote: “Probably not as widely documented is that he accomplished this without the source code: He reverse-engineered the MS-DOS version and then reimplemented it for Windows.” • The Wikipedia article then cites Chen's article for this additional information. It's all fine and proper. I've just edited the citation to make this clear again.
- InsideOutSanta 4mo agoChen doesn't use Wikipedia as evidence that Krueger ported the game. He's pointing out that this is what Wikipedia mentions as most notable, and then adds another thing notable about Krueger, the squigglies. If you read the Chen's whole article, he adds more details about the port at the bottom, so he's clearly aware of it. It's fine to use the article as evidence for the port. These kinds of circular evidence chains do sometimes happen on Wikipedia, but I don't think this is one of them.