What?

Yep, resulting in a draw as white has no legal moves.

Qd3+, either it is stalemate, or you win a queen and win the game

I haven't tested- is memory usage lower if you remove nodes from the tree?

In general I found it easier to separate game models from nodes, and only create nodes when I need them, compared to other engines.

Yep. If king takes, qe4 is mate

Puzzles help with this. This particular pattern appears in puzzles a lot

🤗 hello

Double time is when you cut the time in half. Half time is when you double the time.

Good point. What about paging that menu, or having items overflow into adjacent squares? There's still edge cases there but maybe they are rare enough

Is there a reason you don't dump all the contents of all corpses into that square?

Seriously wtf is going on, I'm about to block them

Iirc the balance was different on arcade too (most notably, you lose one health per second).

When you slam a tequila shot along with it, it's closer to macrodosing a four loko

Another dril banger

Update: he broke the record

But that's also like, the very thing that the people writing the containerization code are looking for constantly right? How practical a concern is that? Any such vulnerability would undoubtedly be plugged as soon as its found.

Containerization is much more common these days than vm's, right?

Ok wsl 2 uses hypervisor which I'm very sad to learn, but I'm still curious about the security part. It seems like you'd have kinda the same security concerns between vm and containers.

These days docker on windows is usually through wsl, which as I understand is not a vm.

Is there something insecure about docker? I've never heard that, I think you have to do some really stupid stuff to make it insecure, but maybe I'm just ignorant

There doesn't seem to be any "insight" in this article, though I do agree with its conclusion.

I'm guessing the difference in performance is purely pointer indirection.

No platform is fully uncensored. But on the at protocol you can find a node that is moderated in a way that you like. If you don't like bskys moderation, you can still use the at protocol, and jay encourages you to exercise that freedom 🙂

But if you leave Facebook you can't easily bring along your old posts and media. Facebook owns that data. Bsky doesn't work the same way.

Look into the AT protocol or listen to some of jays interviews. It's interesting stuff.

Sure, you could argue that. That would probably be more interesting discourse!

Ultimately, BSky is still more speech-friendly since it allows you to leave at any point without losing your data or identity. Meta could change its mind tomorrow and censor again and you can't really leave easily.

Jay and Zuck are so incredibly different, that the fact they share one thing in common- being CEOs- is what makes their difference of opinion interesting.
Again, the whole point of Jay's company is to give power back to users that was always taken. How do you not see the analogy? Do you ignore it?

Everyone knows they are both ceos. You aren't adding anything by mentioning that

I mean, you started the discourse by suggesting that Jay and Zuck are the same simply because they are CEO's, which is dumb to the point of people assuming you are intentionally missing the point. It's not nuanced at all.

I think you might be misinterpreting it, at least sometimes. People mute not because they're sensitive, but because it's exhausting to try and constantly engage with people who aren't really interested in good discourse. It's a waste of time and weeding out people who troll makes it a better place.

Ah, so you say some shit that makes zero sense, someone gives you a response about why it doesn't make sense. Rinse repeat, then when you can't come up with more nonsense, everyone else is just being "sensitive" by engaging with you.

Someone arguing with you does not mean they are sensitive.

Who said anything about ceos?
Zuck compared himself to ceasar, and Jay is criticizing that (and meta's overall strategy, among other companies). It's not about whether someone is literally ceasar or a monarch or whatever. This isn't a "gotcha", you just don't have any media literacy.

What are you trying to do here? Really? Did you look at the photo?

The whole point of bluesky is that it puts more power in the hands of users. There's a very obvious analogy there to taking power from kings. No one thinks zuck is literally a king. Stop being dense.

Next you'll argue that she thinks the name Caesar should be eliminated