Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New Study Finds Performance-Enhancing Drugs for Chess

worldchess.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 141 posts

Re: New Study Finds Performance-Enhancing Drugs for Chess

#91

Post by guelo »

aantix wrote: post #76
zython wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did you hear about these substances and what conviced you to swallow 4(!) pills a day with our national drug caffeine ?

Pretty sure that I initially heard about them through Tim Ferriss's podcast with Charles Poliquin (a world renown strength coach). He talked about them when outlining his sleep routine. http://tim.blog/2016/11/06/charles-poliquin-mass-building-pr... (you will sleep like a rock with a large dose of Magnesium Glycinate, especially if you've been deficient for a while (most coffee/soda/alcohol drinkers are))

I've always shied away from magnesium because of the laxative properties. Have you not experienced that with the glycate form?

Re: New Study Finds Performance-Enhancing Drugs for Chess

#92

Post by germinalphrase »

blacksmith_tb wrote: post #37
sp332 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

L-theanine is popular, I take it in a pill but Soylent added it to their coffee product. (Edit: NOS energy drinks also include L-theanine.) Others I've seen around include Bacopa monnieri, choline, Rhodiola rosea. More examples here https://nootrobox.com/full-stack

Some of us consume our l-theanine in tea, which also contains caffeine (and some other friendly phytochemicals).

Do you favor a particular kind of tea?

Re: New Study Finds Performance-Enhancing Drugs for Chess

#93

Post by keldaris »

yarou wrote: post #78
dududu wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you know what several orders of magnitude means. Did you have an IQ of 10 and then got to 100 or 1000? Anyway, this aside, the feeling that you are few times smarter is there, like I say, it's a high ( which, btw, like any dopamine pumping thing, means your next high needs Moar and moar) . The reality is that you are a bit smarter, not few times more, and you work much more.

I didn't mean orders of magnitude in the literal sense, otherwise I would have included my IQ. Judging from the fact that you created your account recently and your first post ever is negative about Adderall suggests to me that you have an agenda. I'm sorry Adderall fucked up your life bro, but spreading FUD about it does everyone a disservice, especially for those who want to get into cognitive enhancement.

FWIW, I have no personal experience with Adderall or any amphetamines, haven't used any (but am rather curious about trying some day), but I also found your post very confusing due to the phrasing. "One or two orders of magnitude" implies some sort of quantitative assertion, even though a clearly hyperbolic one, and there's no clarification as to how significant the effect you experienced actually was. Pointing that out does not equate "spreading FUD" in any way. Furthermore, the parent's statement that you got "a bit smarter" rather than orders of magnitude smarter is comparatively correct according to any reasonable medical understanding.

Re: New Study Finds Performance-Enhancing Drugs for Chess

#94

Post by mistercow »

otakucode wrote: post #89
_yosefk wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the attitude toward "self-enhancement" using mind-altering substances reflects the suspicion that it really isn't, meaning that the side effects are not worth the positive effects. People have very positive attitudes towards "self-enhancement" through various life-saving surgeries as they don't doubt that being alive a few more years is better than dying from a curable disease in the next few weeks. I'm sure…

The difference is that people have a very closely protected idea of 'normal' and seek to preserve that beyond all else. Ameliorating disease is acceptable to re-attain normal. Enhancement above 'normal' is just as aberrant, if not more so, as permitting disease to spread unchecked. This is woven into the fabric of our society and always has been. The FDA in the US, for example, is tasked with regulating things which…

I'm reminded of the Amish. From what I've read, although many people mistakenly believe that the Amish reject all new technology, they in fact only reject technology which would "change their way of life too much".

I think that people in general have a similar reluctance, and it causes change to be slow (although not as slow as it is for the Amish, of course). People are OK with new drugs that cure diseases because that's not that different from what they already know. It's just a new disease to toss in the age-old bucket of "curing disease". But enhancement past "basically healthy" is a whole new category in people's minds. It feels like an enormous change, even though it's probably not as big (at least in the short term) as curing smallpox.

Re: New Study Finds Performance-Enhancing Drugs for Chess

#95

Post by reddytowns »

yarou wrote: post #78
dududu wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you know what several orders of magnitude means. Did you have an IQ of 10 and then got to 100 or 1000? Anyway, this aside, the feeling that you are few times smarter is there, like I say, it's a high ( which, btw, like any dopamine pumping thing, means your next high needs Moar and moar) . The reality is that you are a bit smarter, not few times more, and you work much more.

I didn't mean orders of magnitude in the literal sense, otherwise I would have included my IQ. Judging from the fact that you created your account recently and your first post ever is negative about Adderall suggests to me that you have an agenda. I'm sorry Adderall fucked up your life bro, but spreading FUD about it does everyone a disservice, especially for those who want to get into cognitive enhancement.

A little touchy, are we?

Re: New Study Finds Performance-Enhancing Drugs for Chess

#96

Post by wapz »

artursapek wrote: post #70
hueving wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Addictive and dependent are too different things. I am dependent on my car, but it is not addictive.

Exactly. I am dependent on Google to do my job, but I am not addicted to it.

How are you dependent on Google for your job? Do you work for google?

Re: New Study Finds Performance-Enhancing Drugs for Chess

#97

Post by Swizec »

otakucode wrote: post #84
Swizec wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few years ago I discovered CogniTea[1]. It's a tea blend that puts 90mg of caffeine, 100mg of L-Theanine and some gingko and such in every tea bag. Best stimulant I've ever used. So I guess I'm on 400mg+ of Theanine per day. Have been for 2 or 3 years. :D I suggest giving it a shot. I got the entire office hooked. My favorite part is that when I travel and don't drink it, there's no headache. Sure, feels like brain…

How many strokes have there been in your office? Ginkgo is not something I would widely suggest to people without knowing how robust their circulatory system is...

None. I didn't know gingko had such dangers associated with it. (and I'm the heaviest drinker, most stick to 1 bag/day)

Where can I read more about these dangers? I've only see good things, really

Re: New Study Finds Performance-Enhancing Drugs for Chess

#98

Post by narag »

RangerScience wrote: post #21
SeanLuke wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> where they discarded human losses on time. This stinks of p-value hunting. I can only imagine the study went like this. They did all these tests and then found that there were no statistically significant improvements after using these drugs. So they said to themselves, how can we tweak the parameters so as to get something publishable? Sure, let's eliminate an entire class of games where our control group does bet…

> else we'd all spend five hours on each move. Chess is about bounded rationality Without any other tools (as in, pencil and paper to note conclusions), do you really think you could make a more effective move given five hours? I mean - if the conclusion of the study is actually that use of drugs gave players a larger personal time bounds within which to think up a move, that's still significant. I don't know about y…

There are some kind of matches that take more than that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correspondence_chess

I know you've said "other tools" (like miniboards) but even in your head, more time is an advantage.

Edit: I wouldn't play a match with five hours time, not even for the whole game. I take that "five hours" was hyperbole.

Re: New Study Finds Performance-Enhancing Drugs for Chess

#99

Post by espeed »

yarou wrote: post #36

Anecdotally, Modafinil improved the functioning of the right hemisphere of my brain. I noticed this type of enhancement with Phenibut as well, my "emotional intelligence" was increased by one or two orders of magnitude. On the other hand, Adderall increased my raw intelligence by several orders of magnitude. I strongly believe that amphetamines should be decriminalized and unscheduled, as they are the only class of p…

Studies have shown that Ritalin gives some with ADHD access to their executive function [1] -- as I recall, it "lights up" the neural pathways that connect that portion of the brain and gives them access to it, and for example, they become empathetic when they normally are not (empathy/perspective is one aspect of executive function).

[1] http://adhdrollercoaster.org/adhd-and-relationships/adhd-imp... (overview with link to UC Berkeley study)

Re: New Study Finds Performance-Enhancing Drugs for Chess

#100

Post by jimmytucson »

tempestn wrote: post #77
zw123456 wrote: post #69

I actually did a test myself with pot a while back, also playing against a computer, my thinking there was that it would provide the most consistent opponent skill level. I tried varying amounts. I saw a fairly significant improvement with small doses, less than what someone would use for entertainment purposes, an amount just before what could be called a high. I think it may increase concentration at the right dosa…

Is it possible the advantage was related to something like creativity or insight?

I've had the same experience as op and yes, I think you're onto something. I'll generate a wider breadth of candidate moves, although I may not calculate each line to the same depth. I guess you could say it encourages lateral thinking (or creativity) over linear thinking (calculation).

This is key for me because under normal circumstances I tend to favor solid but slightly passive lines. If my opponent is playing creative, spirited chess, he can easily gain the initiative and crush me.

Post reply on HN