I like to imagine two actual people controlling this game, and it's their job to control time. If one misses by accident, time for everyone on earth advances a little too quickly.
It took me a while to figure out that the time would advance when one of the paddles missed. I was also disappointed by the way it missed by intentionally moving to the top of the play field.
I wonder how difficult it would be to code it so the miss was more convincing.
I have an old TV that I bought in 2015. It's in this kind of weird situation where it's "too good to throw away but not good enough to actually use". All I have been using it for in the last six years is plugging it into servers that only have a VGA port, and I don't have any of those anymore.
I've thought about mounting it to a wall plugging in a Raspberry Pi and have it constantly rotate fun different types of clocks. Something like this seems like it could be a fit.
I mean none of my TVs are top of the line, I don't own any TVs that cost more than $600, but I did feel like the upgrade to 4K was worth it back in ~2018.
The TV I was referring to was extremely cheap even in 2015. It's not even 1080p, and I'm not even 100% convinced it's even 720p, despite what it says. It served us well enough when I was broke working for academia, but I upgraded everything when I was able to afford it.
Still, this TV is relatively small and could still be kind of fun for a virtual clock, so it might be nice to get a bit more life out of it.
Hi. This is my webpage. I have added some code so the misses are so wild anymore. You may have to refresh your page or clear cookies maybe for this to take effect.
All feedback muchly appreciated and always welcome. Unless too harsh. I'll ask Reddit for more brutal feedback.
Yeah, the left guy's pretty bad. I admire his persistence, though!
They seem to play with a made-up rule set with a handicap: every time the left guy lands a goal, the other guy's score is reset... So left usually starts in the lead, but then quickly loses out again.
I estimate he's behind roughly 89% of the time.
(For a fun exercise, ask Google for that percentage. It's astonishing how wrong the AI answers can get.)
My "AI" response was actually pretty good; It summed up the number of minutes per hour, making only one (glaringly obvious but understandable by some metrics) error:
> Hour 12: The hour (12) is never greater than the minute (0–59), so the time is 0.
Misunderstanding how human clocks work, but right for this clock.
It then doubled that, because there's two 12-hour periods in a day, which was useless but reasonable, and finally divided by 1440 minutes in a day, and got an answer of 9%
Then I asked again, and while it got the same answer, it used totally different "reasoning" that was wrong in a unique way.