Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stimulation Clicker

neal.fun

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 620 posts

Re: Stimulation Clicker

#232

Post by snake42 »

I finished the game and immediately went to pick up my phone to check Instagram. Before I started I had just been thinking about how my lack of capacity to focus has been causing me to get nothing done. Not sure how to escape/re-train myself.

Re: Stimulation Clicker

#234

Post by codethief »

Unfortunately, at some point (while I was getting 5-10k SPS), there was this blue droplet(?) (for a lack of a better word) passing down my screen. Tapping it crashed the game for me on Firefox for Android in the sense that pretty much everything turned non-responsive after that. :\

EDIT: Almost crashed Chromium on Android / Vanadium, too.

Re: Stimulation Clicker

#237

Post by Centigonal »

allemagne wrote: post #167

This is a fun clicker game whose point seems cynical and self-defeating on multiple levels. Despite the HN comments complaining about it being overwhelming and a dark reflection of how awful and distracting the internet is, clearly enough people enjoyed it to get to the front page. The stimulation torture wasn't really torture, but another level to the game. All the content creators whose inclusion at first seems lik…

I think work that contemplates a social phenomenon without driving home any particular opinion or moral can still be interesting.

Re: Stimulation Clicker

#239

Post by zemo »

allemagne wrote: post #218
zemo wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you're looking at it from a framework that there's a "right" way to interpret a given piece of art, or that a given piece of art has "a point" instead of "a set of ways in which people interpret it". You're describing one way of interpreting it and then leveling a charge against the piece when, in reality, that charge should be leveled at that interpretation.

I do believe there's an intended interpretation or "point", and that's what I'm commenting on. Do you disagree with this?

are you asking about this specific piece or about art in general? Either way yes I disagree.

I don't know the author of this work. I don't know what they intended, so I can't comment on their intentions. I don't know if there's an "intended interpretation" or not, I don't know what that intended interpretation is, I don't know if it lines up with the interpretation you described. If the author intended for a specific, singular interpretation, I would reject that; any interpretation is just one of many. Some interpretations make more sense than others, and how a piece is interpreted can easily change from person to person, or even over time for a single person. Whatever you get out of it: it's true that that's what you got out of it.

Post reply on HN