I'm working on a self-hostable replacement for Google Timeline, which is being discontinued. It includes a web app to view my timeline and an Android app to send tracking pings to the server. It also includes an import function for exports of your Google Timeline data so that your historical data from that can be integrated as well. I'm planning on open-sourcing both the web app and the POC Android app early next month.
In line with the self-hosting idea, I'm working on an iOS app which can be used as a native app, or can serve itself as a webapp on your local network (so that you can also use it from your laptop). There is no cloud, your phone is the server, your data stays with you at all times.
I'm kind of surprised no one seems to have explored this idea before (happy to be shown examples proving otherwise!)
Knowing the rules and 'seeing' the ways that pieces can move are different things. I could see this being helpful to someone who has a working knowledge of the ways pieces can move, but hasn't yet built their skill of visualization thereof.
So we should delay the development of their visualization skill, because otherwise visualization is useless in chess? This works literally against what chess is about and materializes the least complex aspect of the game into a visual noise all over the board.
Except this doesn't help you visualize it either. I can understand this argument for online boards that, when you click on a piece, highlight all the legal moves. This set doesn't do that, it basically just reminds you how the pieces move.
I don't think anyone that actually plays or teaches chess thinks this is a good set design. Honestly amazed by how many people called this clever. I also find it weird that OP claims it makes the board "easier to probe", when it does the exact opposite. This is a textbook example of making up a problem, rather than a solution.
Why call it "name and shame" and not just "name"? Be honest about the behavior and let people judge for themselves whether the behavior is shameful. If an action is above-board, the actor should not mind being named.
Require that a person besides the author has to review code changes before they are allowed into a code base. Do it under the guise of 'transparency' or 'being on the same page'. Don't let him see your post.
