He says that the Perlucery goal has produced two narrow definition of a game. Does he think that is just pure gibberish or do you think it is saying something coherent if misguided or do you just agree with it i feel like we have to reflect on the jury is how depending on how well the argument works. If there were a game where i couldn't specify the end state it would be very difficult and i might not play it so it's not a game to me  if a game refuses to be played is it like monopoly it's fuck that there's no end state that's uh well this is actually an issue in the paper that i also wanted to ask you about

Get the Snipd
podcast app

Unlock the knowledge in podcasts with the podcast player of the future.
App store bannerPlay store banner

AI-powered
podcast player

Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features

Discover
highlights

Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode

Save any
moment

Hear something you like? Tap your headphones to save it with AI-generated key takeaways

Share
& Export

Send highlights to Twitter, WhatsApp or export them to Notion, Readwise & more

AI-powered
podcast player

Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features

Discover
highlights

Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode