Jake Ouellette

@jakeout.com

Work: Eng @ Google, formerly Twitter, works on tools for developers (Firebase) Hobbies: kid-friendly puzzle website: (https://zeepza.com), Indie game dev: (https://jakeout.itch.io), drawing comics (http://drawblanks.com) & more: https://jakeout.com/about

I had some feedback that some of the UX bits of zeepza weren't landing for the younger end, I added a new "Jr" difficulty that is simplified for folks. My daughter enjoyed it :)

child friendly version of "letter drop" puzzleKid friendly version of "wordbox"

Yesterday's letterdrop had a couple glitches, so I added some systems to (1) prevent proper names (2) validate unique answers and (3) give "partial credit" for to make it easier to tell which words are part of the (ideally) single valid solution.

screenshot of web puzzle game zeepza

Feedback has been super helpful on zeepza so far! My favorite thing of giving it to other people is how quickly they find things that should have been obvious to you

My kids and I do daily puzzles, like the NYT puzzles and such... but connections is kinda hard if you're a kid. I made a daily puzzle website that is kid-accessible, parent-fun, would love feedback zeepza.com

Letterdrop, a daily game

This is like one of the worst security vulnerabilities I've ever seen, they hard coded the root password identically in every single mower and the firmware resets it back every single time you update it. It can shows you the wi-fi credentials, address and email of every user. Great piece by Sean.

Sean Hollister@seanhollister.bsky.social · 3mo ago

If you have, or know someone, with a Yarbo robot lawn mower... they might want to read this. www.theverge.com/tech/925696/...

A student & I got a 4 page review on a manuscript we submitted to a peer reviewed journal. It’s hard not to suspect AI. But however this was generated, this line was so troubling: "There is mention of limitations to the research, which also undermines transparency and credibility of the manuscript."

c. Limitations of the study and future research: There is mention of limitations to the research, which also undermines transparency and credibility of the manuscript. The conclusion briefly states "further research is required" but does not explain what questions remain unanswered or how future studies could address limitations.
d. Overstepping in policy/practice recommendations: The authors should be mindful that their policy and practice recommendations currently go beyond the data and analysis provided. The study did not examine policy implementation or effectiveness, and have not provide evidence that suggest which interventions would work. As currently framed, the recommendations read as prescriptive rather than grounded in the analysis. In revising the manuscript, the authors should temper their recommendations by framing these as potential implications and link each one explicitly to a theme.
e. Conclusion: This final part of the discussion is fairly generic rather than a tightly written set of conclusions that synthesises the key findings and provides a strong closing argument.