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

Stockfish 19

stockfishchess.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 165 posts

Re: Stockfish 19

#131

Post by k2xl »

kelipso wrote: post #106
rigrassm wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (Disclaimer, I’m the founder of chess67.com) You're so evil lol.

Created Feb or March this year it looks like lol.

LOL. So here is the truth: I named it because my oldest son was really into the “67” meme. I was trying to come up with a domain name, everything decent seemed taken, and chess67.com was available.

I figured it would just be a temporary name until I came up with something better.

Then it stuck. I will say it has been easy for my customers to remember the name!

Re: Stockfish 19

#132

Post by bumbledraven »

jan_m_savage wrote: post #42

I am a fairly good player but after playing 22000 games, I came to the conclusion that ideas and strategies from chess are context-dependent and don't much transfer to real life. I'd rather spend all that time reading up on game theory and play some fun video games, like Red Dead Redemption.

Compared to chess, Magic: The Gathering ability transfers much better to real life. MtG has:

- dealing with imperfect information

- bluffing

- thinking ahead with an enormous number of possible moves (especially when you consider deck construction)

- tracking board state

- mentally implementing "triggers"

Re: Stockfish 19

#133

Post by [deleted] »

jan_m_savage wrote: post #110
tvelichkov wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me of: "The ability to play chess is the sign of a gentleman. The ability to play chess well is the sign of a wasted life." Paul Murphy.

I got to a 1900 bullet rating in two years, playing an average of 10 to 30 games a day--while not learning any theory! (I wanted to discover theories on my own). And that's when I realized nah, it's not worth it. That's a great quote, thanks for sharing.

[deleted]

Re: Stockfish 19

#134

Post by ViktorRay »

I think an interesting problem would be for a LLM from OpenAI or Anthropic to try to learn chess from first principles and then use that knowledge to try and beat Stockfish.

I wonder if anyone at those companies is trying to tackle this problem.

Re: Stockfish 19

#135

Post by zem »

tvelichkov wrote: post #68
jan_m_savage wrote: post #42

I am a fairly good player but after playing 22000 games, I came to the conclusion that ideas and strategies from chess are context-dependent and don't much transfer to real life. I'd rather spend all that time reading up on game theory and play some fun video games, like Red Dead Redemption.

Reminds me of: "The ability to play chess is the sign of a gentleman. The ability to play chess well is the sign of a wasted life." Paul Murphy.

*Morphy

Re: Stockfish 19

#136

Post by tetec1 »

ViktorRay wrote: post #134

I think an interesting problem would be for a LLM from OpenAI or Anthropic to try to learn chess from first principles and then use that knowledge to try and beat Stockfish. I wonder if anyone at those companies is trying to tackle this problem.

It's probably quite challenging if you want to avoid chess information to be in the training data.

Re: Stockfish 19

#137

Post by computably »

RivieraKid wrote: post #59

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that a few years old version of Stockfish running on a modern MacBook Air with 1 min per move is unbeatable if the game starts from the initial position. Even if the opponent is the latest Stockfish with 1000x more time per move, it will always be a draw. I asked about this a few years ago in a Stockfish Discord and the above claim is what someone implied, if I remember correctly.

The post literally says

> against Stockfish 18, this new release brings an Elo gain of up to 44 points, and wins more than three times as many game pairs as it loses.

Re: Stockfish 19

#138

Post by kzrdude »

zarzavat wrote: post #53
kzrdude wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't one problem that it's hard to determine what equivalent compute is, for CPU search vs a neural net based engine like AZ or Leela?

It's more fundamental than that. AlphaZero is a shallower search with a heavier evaluation function. Stockfish is a deeper search with a lighter evaluation function. In chess, depth usually wins because of how narrow the search tree is compared e.g. to Go.

Interesting, and if you don't mind, where do we put humans (and superhumans like Magnus Carlsen)? I think they have a heavy evaluation function and do shallower search.

Re: Stockfish 19

#139

Post by FergusArgyll »

kzrdude wrote: post #138
zarzavat wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more fundamental than that. AlphaZero is a shallower search with a heavier evaluation function. Stockfish is a deeper search with a lighter evaluation function. In chess, depth usually wins because of how narrow the search tree is compared e.g. to Go.

Interesting, and if you don't mind, where do we put humans (and superhumans like Magnus Carlsen)? I think they have a heavy evaluation function and do shallower search.

Way way shallower search. A human doesn't consider more than a few candidate moves. But they (we?) build up much better intuitions and heuristics

Re: Stockfish 19

#140

Post by RivieraKid »

computably wrote: post #137
RivieraKid wrote: post #59

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that a few years old version of Stockfish running on a modern MacBook Air with 1 min per move is unbeatable if the game starts from the initial position. Even if the opponent is the latest Stockfish with 1000x more time per move, it will always be a draw. I asked about this a few years ago in a Stockfish Discord and the above claim is what someone implied, if I remember correctly.

The post literally says > against Stockfish 18, this new release brings an Elo gain of up to 44 points, and wins more than three times as many game pairs as it loses.

I'm talking about games that start from the initial position.
Post reply on HN