Minecraft with object impermanence

Can confirm.

Whenever I'm reminded of the existence of things like Villagers, or the End, my brain still goes "oh yeah, that new thing they added" before reality catches up and I realize just how long those things have been in the game.

Part of it is because 80%+ of my playtime was before they were added, but I think another part of it is that those things have never really quite fit into the game in my mind.

Minecraft has been around for more than 15 years, and the game was already fully recognisably itself by around 2012. There's 13 years of additions that will always feel mostly unnecessary to many players.

This was me. Played the beta for a little bit, didn’t find what was there very compelling and stopped with the year.

A decade later it turns out my sister got into it that she had a realms server with friends and I joined. Basically a completely different game, which is mostly a positive.

Though mojang really needs to fix inventory management bullshit, which is not fun. There are many more possible items now, but with the same inventory space as the game started with, meaning anything you do results in inventory constantly filling up.

This exactly. I wouldn't be surprised if most HN readers had played a bit of Minecraft 13 to 15 years ago and still represent Minecraft like that even after all that time. I'm definitely one of those BTW.

Infinidev here :) It's wild to think that some people played Minecraft, had kids, and some of their kids are older than I was when I started playing Minecraft.

The kids teased me so much for trying to build an obsidian generator. Almost the whole game was new for me.

I first played Minecraft when Notch was posting demos as zip files on the TIGSource forums. I playtested and kept playing off and on until a little after the 1.0 release but that was still over 10 years ago. Some of the early demos also had object impermanence. You would leave a chunk and when you went back to it, it had been re-generated.

I stopped playing anything beyond 1.7.10.

I still play a lot of 1.7.10 though, because of gtnh. Loving that modpack quite a bit.

Recently I found myself looking at an old alarm clock with a seven-segment display, but the segments were lit up arbitrarily, making an unreadable pattern instead of a time. But then I remembered, oh yeah, that's right, I do have a broken old alarm clock that does that, it's probably just that, I'm not dreaming. And I fell back into the dream.

The funny thing is, I really do have an old alarm clock that does that. It's the most useless alarm clock ever, because not only can it not tell you the time, it can't even tell you if you're awake.

Funny enough, I never really needed these tricks. Or I guess, I do have one? It's when I realize the events are scripted. I don't know why, but many of my dreams are perfectly sensical and linear, and sometimes I notice and hijack them. What I can do with them tho, depends on how close I am to waking up.

Saddest one was when I realized I was walking my dead dog. She was actually exhibiting behaviors I know she had been used to have, but not ones I had consciously remembered much when thinking about her after her death. I lingered on that one a bit. Still, dreams are dreams, and there was some weirdness, and I knew them for what they were. But that time, I did not fight the script.

> There is one where you need to look at time, look away and look again. The time will change or be in an impossible format if you're dreaming.

I did a bunch of lucid dreaming when I was younger (seems it was a lot easier then?), and even knowing things like that can end up making sense in the dream, you sometimes end up thinking "Well, it kind of makes sense the time went from 11:00 to 14:00 when I looked away, I did look away for quite a while".

For people who haven't lucid dreamed before, it might sound simple and almost stupid, but a lot harder when you're trying to look at your watch and everything makes sense but also not.

The way you described is only one technique, and lucid dreams obtained with this technique have a false positive rate higher than wake-induced (WILD) methods. These false-positives are normal dreams masquerading as lucid. An example is flying like superman “because you know you are in a dream and you can do anything” in order to get the milk from supermarket because your dream-wife told you there is no milk in the kitchen. See the logic error?

>Techniques for lucid dreaming rely on this fact for you to be able to "detect" that you are in a dream.

I wish I could figure out how to do that, anytime I'm dreaming all the weird inconsistencies and people morphing from one person to another and such all just seem to be normal.

Yeah, I can't detect it at all. When dreaming, everything feels 100% real despite how unrealistic it gets: my vision is blurry, it's always in a darker hue even in the daylight, colors are grayish, i can't reason, my long term memory doesn't work, objects don't stay where they are, no logic to anything, sounds are weird. Yet, I can't tell if it's a dream. I can't even think about whether it's a dream or not. My reasoning module doesn't function. If things become so stressful, I wake up, but that's about it.

I'd still call that permanence module :) AFAIK, that the way our vision works is that our eyes only see a narrowly focused region in detail and the rest of our periphery is generated by our brain (based on what we saw there before). There are optical illusions based on that.

Or guide them towards their true goal.

It's an interactive experience, but you are not interacting with, having any impact on, a world.

I would say that TUOT is absolute essential reading (even more than the -- justifiably -- better-known Library of Babel), since the fact that things disappear unless kept in memory is exactly how the digital world works.