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

101–110 of 207 posts

Re: Stockfish 14

#101

Post by matsemann »

dmingod666 wrote: post #87
stouset wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't comment as to their commentary, but lichess has them soundly beat in pretty much every other way.

Seriously, I am a paying customer of chess.com -- I for the life of me could not get a new user signed up to play chess with. We wanted to play and selected the wrong level by mistake ( beginner ) -- it won't allow you to play even if you are friends on the site. Horrible user experience. You want to play variants on your phone, can't. go to the website.. Lichess is just awesome! Play anyone you want, variants on the…

I basically only play Lichess now (>3k games last few years), but used chess.com once in a while still to play with friends having an account there. Never had the problem you describe, sounds like PEBCAK. The constant chess.com hating here and on reddit is kinda off-putting, though.

Re: Stockfish 14

#102

Post by maeln »

mlang23 wrote: post #82

For those of you with a little CPU time to spare, the fishtest project should be mentioned here. Stockfish has a "CI" which self-plays all PRs before accepting them. The client is easy to install. Go get it! https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests https://github.com/glinscott/fishtest

You can also run Fishnet (which use stockfish) to provide analysis for Lichess.org :)

https://github.com/niklasf/fishnet

Re: Stockfish 14

#103

Post by wohfab »

I am not too familiar with the pro chess world nor the AI chess world. But did anybody try yet to make the AI always try to achieve a draw?

Re: Stockfish 14

#104

Post by michaelt »

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.

Most people I've seen talking about chess use "blunder" to describe a mistake with almost-immediate consequences like the loss of materiel.

A move that worsens the position in a way that's not so immediately obvious might be called a 'mistake' or 'inaccuracy'

By these standards, it's quite possible for a game between humans to be won or lost without a blunder on either side.

Re: Stockfish 14

#105

Post by trianx »

wohfab wrote: post #103

I am not too familiar with the pro chess world nor the AI chess world. But did anybody try yet to make the AI always try to achieve a draw?

Just train it to make it win. Then, anytime it is a bit in front, perform suboptimal moves, until things are even (those engines typically have a score on whether they are in front or not).

Re: Stockfish 14

#106

Post by yewenjie »

warent wrote: post #54
andrewchambers wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans can gain hundreds or thousands of points per year at the start, but then tend to plateau afaik, it's actually easy to check this out on peoples public lichess accounts. Here is the world champion: https://lichess.org/@/DrNykterstein If you browse some other people, especially young and new players you can see the improvement over time.

Nitpick, certainly not thousands. When you're first starting out even if your elo is like 400, you'll be lucky to break 1000 after a year unless you study very diligently. The gap from 1000-2000 then takes multiple years (probably like 4-5 of diligent study) Climbing chess elo is very hard and slow!

I don't know about Elo but I reached 2100 from 900 Glick2 (the rating system Lichess uses) on Rapid in little over a year.

Re: Stockfish 14

#107

Post by vfc1 »

I feel like I've been playing against it a lot in chess.com, with the tremendous amount of cheating that is going on online, every 1 out of 6 or 7 games is an engine user (I know because I report them, and they get banned).

It's great to have a better engine, but I feel that would benefit the most the online chess community is not a better engine, but an open source cheat detection system, if that's even possible.

I wouldn't know how to build one, but I think that is a lot more important for chess right now, still it's great to have a better engine so congratulations and thank you to the Stockfish team.

Re: Stockfish 14

#108

Post by madflame991 »

vfc1 wrote: post #107

I feel like I've been playing against it a lot in chess.com, with the tremendous amount of cheating that is going on online, every 1 out of 6 or 7 games is an engine user (I know because I report them, and they get banned). It's great to have a better engine, but I feel that would benefit the most the online chess community is not a better engine, but an open source cheat detection system, if that's even possible. I…

How do you figure out they're using an engine? Are there obvious human moves and AI moves?

Re: Stockfish 14

#109

Post by lionkor »

madflame991 wrote: post #108
vfc1 wrote: post #107

I feel like I've been playing against it a lot in chess.com, with the tremendous amount of cheating that is going on online, every 1 out of 6 or 7 games is an engine user (I know because I report them, and they get banned). It's great to have a better engine, but I feel that would benefit the most the online chess community is not a better engine, but an open source cheat detection system, if that's even possible. I…

How do you figure out they're using an engine? Are there obvious human moves and AI moves?

I guess you could compare the outputs for different engines with that of a "suspicious" player - if their moves match exactly, flag them, if it happens too many times, ban them. Something like that.

Re: Stockfish 14

#110

Post by JosephRedfern »

madflame991 wrote: post #108
vfc1 wrote: post #107

I feel like I've been playing against it a lot in chess.com, with the tremendous amount of cheating that is going on online, every 1 out of 6 or 7 games is an engine user (I know because I report them, and they get banned). It's great to have a better engine, but I feel that would benefit the most the online chess community is not a better engine, but an open source cheat detection system, if that's even possible. I…

How do you figure out they're using an engine? Are there obvious human moves and AI moves?

I guess a basic implementation might compare the moves performed by the player under evaluation against the move that an engine would suggest?

Presumably an excellent player might often make the same moves as an engine, so this measure alone isn't going to be perfect. But it could be a starting point. You might also look at the player's historical performance and watch for suspicious changes, or perhaps look for patterns in the time taken to play the move?

Post reply on HN