It’s so the position: absolute for .leaves works relative to .tree. The implication is that .leaves is a descendant of .tree.
position: absolute looks for the nearest ancestor with a set position in order to determine its own positioning context. Otherwise the absolute positioning would basically be relative to the viewport. If the position: relative was missing, the leaves would be against the bottom edge of the image.
edit: I mean .leaves, not .branch


126Saying “over” is the old radio protocol. The new radio protocol is starting by saying the number of characters in the message.


Had a beard. He clean shaved a couple weeks ago.


The gibs and blood from enemies is very bright when it stains the ground; I wonder if that ties into a new gameplay mechanic somehow. I think this is also hinted at by the last scene with the psycho in the rain and giant pool of blood. It could also just be a new visual effect.


Both surgeons are bad it seems. Assuming X went first and played in the middle (the most optimal and common move), He could have won a turn early because O would have had to miss a block on O’s previous turn.
Edit: The only case where this isn’t true is if X’s most recent move was the X in the center which would mean that the center was open for every previous turn. That still doesn’t bode well for either of their abilities.
insult to flurries
Good thing you have your fursuit to keep you warm


deleted by creator
I thought decompiling with Ghidra was okay too, I may have just misunderstood the wiki article when I double checked post-commenting and crossed out my comment. I’m not entirely sure what comprises “proprietary techniques”. But I’m pretty sure that documentation needs to be provided in order to keep it on the legal side. Hopefully this project can come back and recieve continued support ala similar decomp projects.
I think the binary they distributed still included the art and sound assets; the users didn’t have to provide their own. And “clean-room” design is more than just providing source code. You need to provide a “paper trial” / commit history and documentation of how the final code was derived from the original code. My mistake, clean room is when you recreate the project without reading the original/compiled code at all. Specifications are written based on observed behaviors of the original user-facing program and new code is written according to that.
Maybe I’m wrong, but wasn’t there a way to release this while avoiding the issue of copyright? My understanding is that publishing “clean-room” reverse engineered code is legal. The graphics and sound can’t be redistributed, but you can distribute a tool to rip those assests from a ROM and let the users provide a ROM they own. This is what Ship of Harkinian does no?
This is worded better than what I said. The second round isn’t 1/2 because the door you initially picked was 1/100.
I was stubborn about this for so long, and I’m still not entirely sure I understand it, but here is a perspective that made me doubt my belief.
Imagine the Monty Hall Problem, but with 100 doors and only one grand prize. You pick one; it obviously has a 1/100 chance of being a grand prize. Then Monty reveals 98 doors without grand prizes in them such that the only doors left are the one you chose and one that Monty left unopened. Monty obviously arranged for one of those two doors to have the grand prize behind it. The “choice to switch” is really just a second round of the game, but with a 1/2 chance of winning (wrong, your odds change only if you “participate” in round two).
If you stick with your door, you are relying on your initial 1/100 chance of winning. If you switch, you are getting the 1/2 odds of the “second round”.
Apparently with three doors, switching gives you a 2/3 chance of winning, but I don’t understand the math of how to get that answer and I wouldn’t be able to calculate the odds of the 100 door version. I just know intuitivey that switching is better.
If it felt like suffering you should consider seeing a urologist.


I’ll know the Fediverse is mainstream when I inevitably see this post and comments in a top 10 list or being read by an AI voice and posted to a video sharing site as part of an automated content farm.
Ironic