There are alternatives that are arguably better.
You can play the exact same puzzles as on the NYT site without giving them your traffic. There are archives of their puzzles that you can play for free. If you like connections, go to https://www.connectionsunlimited.org/. For wordles, go to https://wordlearchive.com/. Just Google for archived versions of your favorite games.

Then there’s also other publications that have puzzle games live this. For example, as I like the mini crosswords, there’s a student publication, The Observer, that has these mini crosswords too: https://fordhamobserver.com/category/fun-and-games/daily-mini-crossword/.

Supporting the tech workers at NYT doesn’t mean you have to give up your daily game addiction

Now compare that with the inflation their economic plans will cause. 100 or 1000% tarrifs will turn most of Trump’s greens to red real quick

So cool it hurts, apparently?

No yiffs, glans, or butts.

… i just myself really uncomfortable for a pun.

digging into wallet … Wait! … who’s butt? Yours or mine? … eh shrug … continues digging into wallet

Looks like a 30 percent more rustic/medieval Johnny Carino’s

Slutty slutty Blizzard

Also may help to have improved blower (fan replacement/more focused outlet)

I didn’t sign a release!

As a python developer, I’ll accept the shower joke in stride. But who are these Esperanto speakers you’re shitting on?

If there were a 4th spatial dimension and you could see in 4 dimensions, yes, you could see the inside of things that are enclosed in 3 dimensions. It wouldn’t be like x-ray vision exactly though. Think about a sphere in 3d. It is enclosed. When you take 2d projections of the sphere by slicing cross-sections of the ball, from a 2d observer on that plane, they would also see an enclosed circular object. But from the 3rd dimensional observer looking down at that cross section they can see everything enclosed in the circle. From the 4th dimension, then it stands to reason they would have a similar view of a 3 dimensional objects innards. But rather than seeing through the object like in an x-ray, they just see the whole thing laid out in every detail at once like we see the insides of the 2d circle.

I disagree. I think we are very much hardwired to innately understand 3d space in an intuitive level. All else about higher and lower dimensions is learned experientially and/or academically, and it’s near impossible not to understand it in terms that relate to 3 dimensions or math. I also think that thinking about 4 dimensions in relation to 3 dimensions makes it impossible to truly understand 4 dimensional space as a whole. We can describe every detail of it mathematically, but still not be able to visualize it in whole. Regardless, given the fact that there is no 4th spatial dimension, I doubt either of us will ever have a definitive answer.

I’ve read it. Recently actually. It is really cool. It kind of supports my point though. It’s hard for those to both comprehend and describe that have been in higher dimensional spaces and much of what they do describe is in 3 dimensional terms, (enclosed spaces being visible as if by an open top being a good example of trying to comprehend a thing that would be uncomprehendable in 4d through a 3d mindset). Of course, it’s also written by an author that hasn’t actually experienced such things and is also trying to imagine what it would be like to experience his interpretation of the phenomenon, so… not exactly conclusive either way.

Interact with, yes. Process and perceive it as it truly is? I don’t believe so, no.

You are correct that 4d toys (and other games) already simulate 4 spatial dimensions. But those games all display the 4th dimensional space from a 3 dimensional projection. I think what OP is suggesting is creating a game that displays an actual 4 spatial dimensions. I have argued in another comment that I don’t think this is possible in a way that our brains could ever percieve or process due to the limitations of a brain evolved in 3 spatial dimensions.

For clarity the word is perpendicularity. A 4th spatial dimension would have to be perpendicular to all 3 other spatial dimensions.

There’s nothing technically stopping us from simulating 4 spatial dimensions now. In fact, there are several games that utilize a 4th dimension in their gameplay. Here’s 8 examples. The problem is that our brains evolved in 3 spatial dimensions and, even if we can conceive of, define the nature of, and to some degree even indirectly imagine a 4th spacial dimension, our brains are hardwired to think in 3 dimensions and our understanding of a 4th spatial dimension can only be in 3 dimensional terms. The software of our brains, and the hardware of our eyes are simply incapable of perceiving and processing a 4th spatial dimension as it truly is. It would always be filtered through the lens of 3 spatial dimensions, projected into a 3 dimensional form that we can understand.

For a good example of this limitation, we regularly show 3 dimensions in film, tv, animations, video games, etc. projected on 2 dimensional surfaces. We can interpret those 2 dimensional images into an understanding of the 3 dimensional spaces being projected, but A) we do not actually perceived them as 3d. We still only see height and width. Depth is imagined largely based on perceived scale and parallax oocclusion. and B) we are only able to see the 3 dimensional space in our minds because that is how our minds always perceive space. In order to make those 2 dimensional images seem actually 3 dimensional, we have to project different 2 dimensional images to each eye with precise focal lengths and angles to mimic our actual eyesight in 3 dimensional space. Only with that stereoscopic view do we actually see 3 dimensionality with actual depth. Now, with that understanding, that it takes 2 projections in 2d to trick our minds into seeing 3d, how would you trick our perception into seeing 4d? How to we make either our eyes or our brains see whatever the 4th dimensional direction is called? A 3rd eye? No, plenty of animals have more than 3 eyes or even compound eyes, and still only perceive 3d. We have to perceive a direction perpendicular to height, width, and depth that does not actually exist. How would you achieve that goal?

I don’t think that is actually possible. I think, like those games in the link, even in a simulation we are stuck playing with the 4th dimension via its interaction with and projection onto 3 dimensions because our brains cannot truly process what a 4th spatial dimension would even be.

My father in law owns fireworks stores, so instead of the thumbs up emoji. He sends the fireworks emoji.

Me: Hey, I dropped off some papers on your counter and brought in a package from your porch.

Father-in-law: 🎇

You all nag about how Americans have no food culture of their own, that they just steal and adapt other countries’ foods. Then when you see true American creation and innovation, you reel back in fear and disgusting. Cowards!

I like to think the reason the robbed guy didn’t shoot the robber initially was because the robber was less armed than him and it wouldn’t have been fair. When he stole his first gun, he must’ve thought “ohhhh, big mistake”.