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

Stockfish 14

stockfishchess.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 207 posts

Re: Stockfish 14

#91

Post by Closi »

SamBam wrote: post #52
tus89 wrote: post #25

Is it just me or is battle-of-the-AI chess more exciting than humans?

Minor thought, but one of the things I love about high level AI chess, like Stockfish vs AlphaZero, is seeing how their ratings of positions change over the course of the game. I had realized a while ago that, as a human, the computer will give your position a score, and then you make a move, and your score can pretty much only stay the same (if you make a "perfect" move) or go down. Much of the time, it goes down. T…

> Two humans playing each other, it's just a question: who's score goes down less each time they make a move? It became a little sad. It seemed like either you can make the right move, or you make a sub-optimal move, and the winner is simply the one who makes the fewer sub-optimal moves.

It’s also evaluating your own position vs someone else’s - humans and computers are the same in that both will make the move they think is best, and will only have an oh shit moment when their opponent has provided a reply they didn’t expect.

The only difference is computers can see further, so while an oh shit moment for a human might be 4 moves out, with a computer it might be 20.

Re: Stockfish 14

#94

Post by bluecalm »

vikingerik wrote: post #75
SamBam wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Minor thought, but one of the things I love about high level AI chess, like Stockfish vs AlphaZero, is seeing how their ratings of positions change over the course of the game. I had realized a while ago that, as a human, the computer will give your position a score, and then you make a move, and your score can pretty much only stay the same (if you make a "perfect" move) or go down. Much of the time, it goes down. T…

In a game of perfect information and no randomness, there are ultimately only two kinds of moves: those that preserve your current best forcible outcome (win or draw in chess*), and those that blunder that into a worse result given continued perfect play by the opponent. Everything else like a positional score or centipawns or even classic material points is an abstraction, that we use to summarize because we don't h…

There is a way to objectively distinguish moves from the same category though (drawing ones or losing ones). It's similar to Kolmogorov complexity. Let's say moves A and B both draw but the shortest algorithm that draws vs A is much longer then one that draws against B. We can say A is objectively a better move. In practice instead of formal definition we could use a benchmark engine. What's minimum CPU time/RAM requirements for an engine to draw the resulting positions (or convert them to a win in case of losing moves).

A move that requires serious hardware to defend against is better than one a 10 years old laptop can hold a draw against.

Re: Stockfish 14

#97

Post by mellosouls »

elias94 wrote: post #49
jeremyjh wrote: post #33

And chess.com still uses version 8...

True, but who uses chess.com anymore?

Ridiculous comment.

Chess.com is brilliant, and I use it as well as the less popular (but also brilliant) Lichess.

Lichess is "cooler" because it's non-profit but honestly, comments like that are reminiscent of the childish anti-Microsoft barbs from Linux ideologues that have thankfully declined in recent years.

Re: Stockfish 14

#98

Post by ThomasCM »

surround wrote: post #92
elias94 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but who uses chess.com anymore?

chess.com ranks #195 whereas lichess.org ranks #1546 on Alexa's top sites. https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/chess.com https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/lichess.org

If anyone is looking for a way to merge games from lichess.org and chess.com: I'm developing a website where you can link your accounts to view stats for all of your games. It's free and currently in Beta: https://www.chessmonitor.com/

Here is an example for the current world champion: https://www.chessmonitor.com/u/kcc58R9eeGY09ey5Rmoj

Re: Stockfish 14

#100

Post by slampig »

mlang23 wrote: post #88
nl wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really. What they are describing is that feeling you get when you suddenly realize you are losing even though you are even in pieces, because you suddenly see your opposition has superior positioning and board control It's not a blunder, because there wasn't one particular move where the game slipped away. At high levels, blunders are rare.

If the evaluation of a position were only about the raw material count, the game would be rather dull.

The "oh shit" move doesn't necessarily make your position suddenly way worse, it can be just the moment when you realize how much better your opponents position has been for a while.
Post reply on HN