No, I have principles. I wish to see people live the best possible lives for themselves, out from under tyranny and oppression, without the threat of death and violence and mayhem from those who have power over them, to the greatest degree of liberty and human rights that they can accommodate reasonably.
Because of my principles, I do not pretend cultural or moral relativism has legitimacy, and that somehow religious or cultural rationalizations of murder and oppression and mayhem can't be assessed as such because I'm halfway across the other side of the planet living a good life of riches nearly unimaginable to previous generations, arguing with people on the internet that I want things to be this good, or better, for everyone, especially the ones currently under the thumbs of tyrants.
I don't want the US to invade and try to build some sort of mythical liberal Iran, I want to see them rise up and get all the support they need to get their best and brightest to rebuild something awe inspiring and new for themselves.
The odds aren't great, but they're not as bad as recent American and Western driven nation building exercises. The Iranian people will have to walk a tightrope, and I'm cheering for them.
You only need the piece type for pawns (that can be upgraded), and a bit on the king to track if castling is possible; otherwise a single bit for on-board/captured is sufficient, since the types of the other pieces are implicit in the array index. (You can shave single bits in a few places -- if the state represents a game in progress the king-captured bit isn't needed; natural bishops only need 5 bits for position on board, etc. This doesn't really add up though.)
On the other hand, there are 32 pieces (max) on a chess board, not 16, so grandparent is off by a factor of more than two.
You can only castle if neither the king nor the rook have been moved (and none of the three squares the king uses may be under attack, and all the squares between the rook and the king must be empty).
Since you could move either rook somewhere and then back to their starting squares, you have to track their eligibility separately. If the king moves, both rooks lose eligibility.
From kernel side, I meant - I wasn't clear. Now I understand what's the meaning of "don't break rust code". Happy that rust's journey in the kernel is successful so far. The pace seems strong.
Totally agree. One might require to be "in their head" a lot of the time to not get swung down, and enjoy himself such as laughing at his own jokes. To make it possible, one has to be free enough to express oneself (also internally). But freedom of thought and action is on the decline as I've come to observe lately, but that's another topic.
Yes, that's an OK take, no big deal. Also it can be added that life in itself really doesn't have a choice, on some level it just happens (thinking more about chemistry here).
Wings3D is a 3D modeller written in Erlang so I would assume you could use Gleam for that as well given that it's the same runtime. Although I think it's probably not the best tool for the job.
Does not work for me on desktop Firefox. When I press the "make it swim!" button, there's an error in console: "Uncaught (in promise) Error: Fish model not loaded"
I could submit a fish on desktop Firefox, but apparently the fish died shortly thereafter. Voting is broken though.
EDIT: Nevermind! Now there's a problem uploading a fish, and the local aquarium is broken, so I can't view the previous one, either. It's a nice idea, but I really wish it worked better with Firefox (being on the web and all).
