Build a working game of Tetris in Conway's Game of Life (2014)
codegolf.stackexchange.com
codegolf.stackexchange.com
Kudos.
Build a Working Game of Tetris in Conway's Game of Life - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38760965 - Dec 2023 (2 comments)
Build a working game of Tetris in Game of Life (2013) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32907893 - Sept 2022 (1 comment)
Build a Working Game of Tetris in Conway's Game of Life (2014) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22871417 - April 2020 (11 comments)
Building a Working Game of Tetris in Conway's Game of Life - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15247935 - Sept 2017 (2 comments)
Building a working game of Tetris in Conway's Game of Life - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15246348 - Sept 2017 (46 comments)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSoqddxoCl8
One could do all sorts of fun abstractions with the simulation data. =3
[0] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/394957/why-can-conway-s-...
Yes, the basic Turing machine model isn't "interactive", it takes some initial input and runs from there.
Edit: Maybe a better way of putting this:
Since you can build a Turing machine as a GoL pattern that will interact with another pattern (its input), analysis of GoL patterns includes analysis of Turing machines, generally.
Doom.
Game of Death doesn’t sound half as fun ;)
The rules are simple, but give rise to complexity.
Despite conservation of mass and such not being a part of the rules, what appear to us to be "objects" arise, and can even exhibit velocity! Physics-lite results out of nowhere.
Finally, nerds like simulations.
Game of Life on the other hand is so simple it can be written up in a few lines of code, and still can give rise to endless complexity.
Also, if I had 1p for every time someone saw a hobbyist CPU and asked "can it run Doom", I'd be a zillionaire.