Mah pretty stupid commentary

Why close the discussion??? Ah was almost there to give it...

Wow, such things happen when one wants to discuss chess and it gets closed down...

Objectively speaking, there are far more posts left open much longer with trollish people not wanting to be fair and polite

So, i feel that closing the post was unfair

There is nothing wrong with a stupid game ...



If the mate is pretty

8D

Is all i wanted to post, sorry to offend people who like closing discussions 8(

Actually, then it's just a stupid game with a pretty mate.

What's the context of this thread? Did someone close your previous thread?

@Akbar2thegreat said in #4:
> What's the context of this thread? Did someone close your previous thread?

Maybe he's anticipating this thread being closed and complaining in advance!

@Akbar2thegreat said in #4:
> What's the context of this thread? Did someone close your previous thread?
@AsDaGo said in #5:
> Maybe he's anticipating this thread being closed and complaining in advance!
@MrPushwood said in #3:
> Actually, then it's just a stupid game with a pretty mate.

Yes yes yes and yes indeed!!!

For starters, most people, they dont play chess, because of thinking they are pretty stupid, or at least they are afraid that chess will only show this...

My opinion is that chess has little to do with marker of intelligence... a computer program can play it, and computers by definition are stupid,..

AI is fiction for all extensive purposes and it is stupid to claim ai exists... that said, i then must concede that in rhetoric AI is embodied in reference and in our vocabulary...

So, lets play with words and ideas, and call our surprised computer results as AI...

Since we are connecting computer playing chess as AI, then i guess i must concede the point, yet, this is a lie, as AI is still science fiction....

But wait... im not saying that Stalkfish is nothing, if not AI... i am simply stating that the general public has been misled to beleive our forays into artificial intelligence to be moer than a Graff , a confidence scheme...

Think about this... if we have figured out AI, we would not be still in this space of vertigo where a white trailer would cause a driving AI issue as “white out”, nor would we be complaining about computer assisted players...

Imagine Morphy alive today... as an intelligence, now think about what this means as artificial intelligence... anyone who needs to deal with a living organism besides themselves, lets say, a cat... realizes quickly this is a thinking being

And then tell me you believe AI exists...

Think of this the Turing test can be affected as a result, so cannot be trusted on “finding true ai”.
Communication with a computer assessing your conversation and “talking to you” by no means clarifies it is a thinking being...

So, all these “programs”, playing chess are simply programs, and should not be the end all of ends... if stalkfish were true ai, it could tell us anything any line “it thinks” is the “best” for analysis of our games...

And right now, never mind when we build tru artificial intelligence, right now we beleive this tripe the computer comes up with...

Lemmie ask you this, when you a person is learning an opening... how many times do you get the lines you want to play?
The frustration of waiting for “those moves” makes us blind to what is happening in the game...

So, how in Tarnation do we imagine we are going to play those continuations with another human in the future, especially when we got into the position that stockfish gives us a “better is” line, was gotten because neither of us play like it...

So, this becomes more baggage to head out into the foray of tourney chess...

Perhaps i am stodgy and old fashioned, but playing another human feels much much better than to play a calculator...

Realize this, “finding” the best move and playing the best chess, will inevitably bring our human brains closer to the calculations a machine can bring... look at 1870’s Anderssen perhaps the most accurate of those masters those days, playing 12 cpl games
Did not have a calculator...

And being stupid is not a thing if you are pretty... (was mah joke).

Yet, intelligence not being a factor as to whether a person can play good chess... it really is the fight for survival the ability to thrive when all else is in ruin... hence many a child play incredible games... for the makeup of human is the nature of survival... we are called wise wise man ... for we are tool man ... and the ability to adapt tools for success is our first wise, our second wise is our ability to make and use tools that are out of our individual capability to use at all, our social ignorances are smoothed out because of this second wise, our self indulgences are our only weakness,

Think about this, how many games have you lost because you “felt” that “this simple indulgence” will not cost you the game?

Certainly our ngn’s of today will beget super chess stars of tomorrow, but none will be happy to use them “in-play”

While it has been proven that advanced chess will make a player stronger, it has also been proven that no opponents want to play an advanced chess player while playing chess au natural...

Thanks for reading

Aacerb8

@Acerb8 said in #6:
> it has also been proven that no opponents want to play an advanced chess player while playing chess at natural
How come is it proven? You can just tell your opinion with certain logic but certainly it isn't proven as such.

@Akbar2thegreat said in #7:
> How come is it proven? You can just tell your opinion with certain logic but certainly it isn't proven as such.
Oh, i am sorry but i did not take into account that there are people of whom like to play players who peek

And yes, you are correct that i made an unsubstantiated claim, but, in my defense, who likes to play someone who is only relaying the moves that a computational device gives them, if i am wrong about no one likes to be played chess with an opponent who is using assistance, then i shall forever be wrong, and im certain that if i ever met someone who likes to play advanced chess without being an advanced chess practitioner, i would simply move on...

However, that is pretty petty of you to find that as a point of conversation, really... why even bother reading if your point is to find logic errors...
... In human conversation, you must be the life of the party...

But yeah thanx for pointing out that there are those who love to be cheated while playing chess
Of course that’s why people cheat in chess, just to give those people who like to be cheated a chance to play a “good game” in their estimation...

Seriously, is that why you pointed out that is surely has not been proven no one wants to play assisted players? Because there is certainly someone who wants to play those assisted?

My stupid commentary

@acerb8

@Acerb8
I didn't even talk about playing with players who use external assistance, did I?
I solely said about playing with players who are much stronger than us.
Maybe I misunderstood your post.
Now I am somewhat getting what your thread in about.

> for all extensive purposes

that's not how the phrase goes.

> And then tell me you believe AI exists...

There are many definitions of AI, one is "the capability of a machine to imitate intelligent human behavior"

I believe self driving cars exist, they so closely imitate human behaviour that they crash occasionally. If they never crashed, are they really imitating humans?

> Thanks for reading

it was hard to follow, I skimmed a bit here and there but gave up trying to understand.