Earlier quoted context omitted.
> are the type of people who think they're smarter than everyone else, but who are actually, in fact, dumber. Usually they lack empathy, are undersocialized, and probably show on the autism spectrum. Projecting? Everything about both of your comments (above) suggest you fit this model perfectly. In the opening of the article the author says: > many people mentioned that they enjoyed playing chess but quit because of…
You've completed missed what I'm saying. I'm saying the best teachers for brand new chess players are those humans who specialize in rapidly training new chess players. The people who should write books on chess training are the people who have been doing it for 20+ years and actually have some authority. These people DO write books but apparently they're less interesting than some 19 year old posting his completely…
How to Get Good at Chess, Fast
141–150 of 156 posts
Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast
#142> "One big mistake is to rely heavily on computers for chess analysis. Computer analysis should be done only after you analyze the game on your own." This isn't correct information anymore, in my opinion. Chess engines have improved tenfold over the last four years (when the author says he stopped playing). The increase in the strength of chess engines has subsequently caused an increase in the "humanity" of chess en…
The point is that having the missed tactics pointed out to you by the computer doesn't do much to improve your chess. It won't help you find a tactic the next time an opportunity comes up. Whereas analyzing seriously and finding tactics yourself (albeit fewer than the computer will point out), _will_ improve your ability to find them over the board.
Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've completed missed what I'm saying. I'm saying the best teachers for brand new chess players are those humans who specialize in rapidly training new chess players. The people who should write books on chess training are the people who have been doing it for 20+ years and actually have some authority. These people DO write books but apparently they're less interesting than some 19 year old posting his completely…
And if you had of replied with the tone you used here, it might have come off a lot better than it did.
Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
I actually agree that a GM is not necessarily the best teacher. But there are people with decades of TEACHING experience, and they are the best teachers. He's certainly within his rights to go around saying you should listen to him. Just like every other useless self-help blogger is. The fact that my calling out his authority and credibility seems to rile up so many people says something about the crowd here. The cro…
Of course these are the BEST teachers, but a) Not being the best doesn't mean you're not good enough b) In his piece he actually recommends young chess players to learn from numerous books authored by accomplished and highly experienced chess teachers such as Seirawan or Silman. Which part of his advice exactly would you call out as useless? "The fact that my calling out his authority and credibility seems to rile up…
My comments aren't authoritative statements, they're analytical. They're a priori deductions/inductions/abductions and as such are self-supporting.
His comments, on the other hand, use a posteriori justification. A posteriori truth claims generally require citation of an authoritative person or authoritative empirical evidence to have value.
If all he's going to do is tell people to go buy some expert's amazon book, might as well just put the affiliate link right in the HN headline and skip the blogspam.
Worthless content is worthless and no amount of startup culture bullshit will change that.
Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast
#145Good chess player - sign of a great mind. Great chess player - sign of a wasted mind.
Wasted in what sense? What do you consider a better use that could have been made of a great chess player's mind?
Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about those "Learn code the hard way" tutorials? anyone tried em?
They are as good as you could hope for a guided tour. They get your feet wet and let you get your bearings. But there is still a large gap between having knowledge of a language and performing synthesis with one. It would be interesting to have a tutorial series for those that get past the syntax stage. I could imagine being given a small problem and asked to craft a solution. Your entry could be graded, perhaps by h…
Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well I have read that article. I do understand that true mastery can take a lifetime. The posted article gives specific chess exercises which when practiced for 3 - 5 months can produce a marked improvement. I was asking whether there any such exercises for programming.
You could try code kata ( http://codekata.pragprog.com/ ) or koans, (just search Google for your language + 'koans') but those are really only a fun way to work on a specific, easily-tested skill, that also happens to be the very first a novice learns, that's implementation. By all means, if they help, knock yourself out. The thing about programming is that to get better at it, you need to expand the way you think ab…
One simplest example: All queries to a single DB table have to be done through a single "Data Class". The class will have functions that will allow other classes to use that table. this ensures that if tmrw, we make changes to that table, there is only one place in the code we have to make the changes. Instead of running around in the massive code base, looking for the queries to that table.
Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast
#148Is there any evidence that becoming good at chess improves any mental aspects or is it just a hard game that you can brag about being able to play?
In the longer term, there is evidence of many strong players in history who obsessed over chess and went insane. You can train your brain to do many things, whether it's memorizing 100,000 digits of pi, or becoming one of the best players in the world at a FPS video game by playing 12 hours a day, but it can't be good for your mental health.
Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast
#149GM Ziatdinov is unique in that he gives the blueprint that he claims will get anyone to master level (2200+) [1], and it's dead simple. It's much of the same:
1. Study tactics a ton [2] 2. Memorize 300 key positions and games 3. Now you are a master
His definition of "memorize" is that you understand the key position/game instantly and without thinking, the same way you walk or read your native language. 300 doesn't sound like a lot, but to understand each key position to the depth he advises, we're looking at the 10,000 hour rule for all 300 positions.
For comparison, either he or another GM claimed that super-GMs know 1000+ key positions/games, and Magnus Carlsen has said he has memorized 10,000+ games.
[1] http://www.amazon.com/GM-RAM-Essential-Grandmaster-Chess-Kno...
[2] He used to have a few thousand tactics problems on his website. He said to do 1-10 quickly until you could get through them without a mistake. He emphasizes quickly, it's about getting new patterns in your brain, not figuring it out on your own. After 1-10 are perfect, do 11-20 until perfect, then 1-20 until perfect, and repeat until you can do all 1-4000 (or however many). At that point he said you will have the tactical ability of a GM.
Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
You could try code kata ( http://codekata.pragprog.com/ ) or koans, (just search Google for your language + 'koans') but those are really only a fun way to work on a specific, easily-tested skill, that also happens to be the very first a novice learns, that's implementation. By all means, if they help, knock yourself out. The thing about programming is that to get better at it, you need to expand the way you think ab…
Exactly. IMO its not just the exercises that help you write great code (though they MIGHT help in competitive coding like for ACM). Truly beautiful code comes from experience and working with those who have spent years getting that experience. In my current company there is a huge focus on the re-usability and extensibility of the code. We are forced to think of future changes and make sure the code allows changing t…
One way your company's method might evolve is into the Active Record pattern. You define a class around a particular table, implementing domain logic inside that class. You see this pattern used in Rails. If you're using one class per table, I think that's the way it will eventually go.
I like Active Record ORMs for many applications, but only as a persistence layer. Implementing domain logic in a data class is asking for pain, it violates the Single Responsibility Principle. Each class should do only one thing. The thing handling your data persistence should only read/write to the database, it should not also perform calculations or perform actions on anything other than the database.
I refactor domain logic out of models when I see it into Plain Objects with no dependencies, and let the domain have its own abstract world of classes minus ugly database wrappers to play in. I can then write an adapter to the data classes. If it's an existing application in production, then at this point I would start to re-design the database, inevitably it will need work.
I do this by creating another database schema, generating the data classes, simple as pie now without domain logic getting in the way, then create the adapter from examining the existing one. I can then import all the data from the database, represent it as abstract plain objects, then shoot those objects through the other adapter into the new database.
But it only really works if everything does one thing. Your domain objects talk to each other. Your adapter classes go between the domain and the data. The data talks to the database. Achieving this requires hard-won experience with programs that break the principles. You have to feel the pain and recognize where it's coming from. No kata will give you this experience.