Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/08/03/watch-how-to-solve-this-hanaya.html
…
1 Like
I buy those for my dad. The ones he has had the most trouble with have been: Hanayama Quartet, Hanayama Vortex he has never been able to but either together again and Hanayama Elk which mom was able to solve once. Nutcase took him 30 min to hour.
3 Likes
Philosophical question, or something, about giving away secrets on-line.
Why is it ok to give away the secret to a puzzle, but not the secret to how a magic trick is done? I mention it because IIRC posts that give away magic secrets have been modded on BB (and certainly on some other forums if not here), but giving away magic secrets doesn’t remove the performance aspect of the trick, that still remains, and I can still be fooled by magicians performing tricks I know the theory of. But giving away the secret to a puzzle, to my mind, gives away all the play value.
(I’m for giving away both…but not for necessarily watching either myself)
1 Like
Solving a puzzle doesn’t diminish someone’s livelihood?
I’m not sure how how you mean that. If you mean it as an answer, as in “unlike giving away the secrets of a magician, showing the secret of a puzzle doesn’t take away a person’s livelihood.” Then I’d say, yes, it does. It potentially takes away the livelihood of the puzzlemaker. A solved puzzle isn’t a puzzle. Whereas magicians are performers who can still dazzle and amaze you even if you know the mechanics of a trick. Puzzle makers, not so much.
So, I’d say, if I had to choose who deserves more protection from having their secrets exposed, I’d have to go with puzzle maker. But I don’t have that forced choice, so I choose neither.
I think of it as similar to spoilers. If someone knows how a magic trick works, it spoils the illusion. If someone spoils a book, movie, or puzzle, it can take away some or all of the satisfaction. In some cases, that may mean they no longer want to attend the magic show or movie, or buy the book or puzzle. There’s a certain point where spoilers are allowable, and the statute of limitations ranges from a few hours in the case of a delayed-broadcast sports event to forever with magic.
1 Like
The science seems to be mixed on whether spoilers hurt our enjoyment of stories. I prefer to be surprised, or so I think. But is the “no-spoilers” analogy sufficient to merit a permaban on magic spoilers when no such ban exists for stories, which are also forever? For me story spoilers are a much bigger deal than magic spoilers. But that is a pretty subjective thing. I think knowing spoilers about the Sixth Sense would affect my enjoyment as much or more than knowing spoilers about a David Blane trick (spoiler: he lies).
With live performers, there’s an interesting legal precedent around spoilers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zacchini_v._Scripps-Howard_Broadcasting_Co.
1 Like
Interesting. When your entire act is only 15 seconds long… Oh, too many jokes present themselves…
But the news was free to report on the act in its entirety in words, and spoilers are generally (I think) words. It was the performance as film footage they were not allowed to broadcast without compensation. So I’m not quite sure how to really analyze this SCOTUS decision on right of publicity and see how it touches on spoilers, trade secret law, etc., though I could see that a magician could claim to be deprived of a right of performance, somehow, but not if the trick wasn’t exclusively his own, and even then it would be tenuous since the mechanism of the trick isn’t the performance any more than sheet music is a performance.
1 Like
Took me a couple of evenings doing it on my. Which reminds me, I have a box full of puzzles somewhere in storage that ought to be donated to some kids who might enjoy them.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
