The New York Times just brought the smug know-it-all to the Wordle party.
On Thursday evening, the Times, which bought Wordle in January, introduced "WordleBot" to the world on Twitter. The tweet describes WordleBot as "your daily Wordle companion that will tell you how efficient and lucky you were," but honestly, it just feels patronizing.
Tweet may have been deleted
To put WordleBot to work, one must first solve the daily Wordle, then the Wordle-splaining begins. "I’ll examine your puzzle and tell you what, if anything, I would have done differently," says the self-righteous droid.
Then, it proceeds to pick apart your Wordle strategy guess by guess in humiliating fashion. "Your guess did eliminate five words, but there were some better options. Guessing "RANDY" for example, would have guaranteed eliminating every possible solution but one." Thanks for the feedback WordleBot.
For the first few slides WordleBot kept up a friendly, if not patronizing, disposition, but then it just turned cold: "This was a wasted guess — it didn’t add anything to what we already knew. From this point, you will need some luck to solve the puzzle in six guesses." Oh, is that what I need WordleBot? LUCK?
My coworker, Mashable Australia editor Caitlin Welsh was equally offended by such a rigid approach to strategy, not because she made a bad guess, but because she did in fact have a strategy, and WordleBot was just too ignorant to see it. "Sorry WordleBot," she said, "my third guess today did exactly what I intended it to, which was confirm letter placement? It was not 'wasted'!"
Once WordleBot has broken your spirit, it proceeds to twist the knife and compares your score to how it, a fucking robot, word solve the puzzle.
No comments:
Post a Comment