After a decade of reversing, I got co-op working in DOS Wing Commander
Comments on “After a decade of reversing, I got co-op working in DOS Wing Commander”
3 judges. Scored by all three judges. Only the day’s top stories get the claim check. How far stories are checked
A developer spent eleven years reverse-engineering DOS Wing Commander's memory in DOSBox to add two-player cooperative play, where one player flies the wingman. The write-up walks through locating ship position and velocity in the 64K data segment by diffing memory snapshots, finding rotation vectors via a lucky slot layout, and…
Why it ranked
No. 132 of 139 with a score of 0.56. The panel rated it highest on technical depth (0.93) and new information (0.93), lowest on audience breadth (0.36). Placed No. 132, No. 131 by score alone: the 27th Programming & dev tools story of the day (−0.080). The placement terms move stories; they are not part of the score.
- AI judgeJudge 2claude-haiku-5-5
- Detailed reverse-engineering writeup of DOS game multiplayer with concrete memory addresses and techniques; strong technical depth and reader appeal, but niche audience and limited broad practical relevance for most builders.
- AI judgeJudge 3gpt-5.6-luna
- A deeply substantiated reverse-engineering and systems engineering account, with reproducible low-level techniques, DOSBox hooks, networking, emulation, WebRTC, and tooling. It is niche but highly interesting and practically instructive for programmers; the 2026 browser revival adds timely novelty.
Each judge wrote its line after answering the rubric, with the site and the author still hidden. Every answer behind this is in the table under Score.
Score
0.56total under rubric v2.3
- Significance0.43
- Reader interest0.73
- Audience breadth0.36
- Practical relevance0.50
- Substantiated0.86
- Technical depth0.93
- New information0.93
- Counts against: Promotional0.07
- Counts against: Overclaim0.13
Each judge’s answer per question (0–1), their mean and spread, and what the question adds to the score (weight × mean).
| Question | Judge 1 | Judge 2 | Judge 3 | Mean | Spread | Weight | Contribution (weight times mean) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SignificanceHow much does this change what people in tech know or can do? | 0.42 | 0.35 | 0.52 | 0.43 | 0.17 | +0.24 | +0.103 |
| Reader interestWould a well-informed senior engineer or tech founder want to read this today, and likely pass it on? | 0.53 | 0.80 | 0.86 | 0.73 | 0.33 | +0.26 | +0.190 |
| Audience breadthHow many people who build technology does it concern? | 0.41 | 0.40 | 0.28 | 0.36 | 0.13 | +0.13 | +0.047 |
| Practical relevanceHow useful is it to someone who builds software or tech products? | 0.47 | 0.45 | 0.58 | 0.50 | 0.13 | +0.22 | +0.110 |
| SubstantiatedHow well is it backed? Consider whether it is the primary source, and whether its main claims come with data, code, a demo, a reproducible method or citations. | 0.88 | 0.75 | 0.94 | 0.86 | 0.19 | +0.05 | +0.043 |
| Technical depthHow technically substantive is it? | 0.98 | 0.85 | 0.96 | 0.93 | 0.13 | +0.05 | +0.047 |
| New informationDoes it contain information absent from the stories covered in the last 7 days (list provided)? | 0.89 | 0.90 | 0.99 | 0.93 | 0.10 | +0.05 | +0.046 |
| PromotionalIs it mainly marketing with little substance (a press release, ad or sponsored post with no real information)? A launch post that carries real news is not promotional. | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.12 | 0.07 | 0.07 | −0.19 | −0.014 |
| OverclaimDo the headline or conclusions claim more than the body supports? | 0.21 | 0.10 | 0.08 | 0.13 | 0.13 | −0.11 | −0.014 |
| Sum of contributions | +0.557 | ||||||
| Claim-check penalty | 0.000 | ||||||
| Total, as published | 0.557 | ||||||
Spread is the highest minus the lowest judge answer. marks a spread above 0.40: the judges disagree, and the story is marked contested.
The badge for this ranking, for the author's page or anyone's: one line of HTML, and it links back here.
<a href="https://rubric.hrih.si/editions/2026-11-05/132/"><img src="https://rubric.hrih.si/badge/2026-11-05/132.svg" alt="Ranked #132 on Rubric, 5 Nov 2026" width="245" height="28"></a>Also covered by
No other coverage was clustered with this story.
Elsewhere
Elsewhere: HN 145 pts, front page
Recorded for context only, checked 5 Nov 2026, 05:46 UTC. It played no part in the ranking.