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

The chess bot on Delta Air Lines will destroy you (2024) [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 352 posts

Re: The chess bot on Delta Air Lines will destroy you (2024) [video]

#181

Post by nostromo »

vasco wrote: post #171
kimixa wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That happened to me when I had an ipad in a standing case and the seat in front cranked back - trapping then pinging the tablet across me and by neighbour's lap. Though the ipad itself wasn't damaged, a couple of glasses didn't make it, and required the steward to try to brush up whatever fragments of glass they could. I feel that airlines are a microcosm of "Do you care about who you actions might affect?" - similar…

Airlines shouldn't have reclining seats, it's bad design. Blaming people for the bad design is stupid. I never recline and still blame it on the design. Stupid people exist, you should design for that.

I think reclining is appropriate at night only. If it were up to me, they would be locked upright during the day.

Re: The chess bot on Delta Air Lines will destroy you (2024) [video]

#182

Post by Dylan16807 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #146
reincarnate0x14 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I prefer the Airbus 31x and 32x models without the entertainment systems so much more. On United the Boeing had fucking ads playing NON STOP THE ENTIRE FLIGHT and because I boarded early I'd try to turn off as many around me as possible because somehow the flying public does not mind bright flashing annoying lights in their faces for HOURS.

> because somehow the flying public does not mind bright flashing annoying lights in their faces for HOURS We do. United has just positioned their economy products a hair below Delta by, in part, pulling off crap like this.

"somehow does not mind" wasn't about airline choice, it was about people not hitting the off button.

Re: The chess bot on Delta Air Lines will destroy you (2024) [video]

#183

Post by [deleted] »

kimixa wrote: post #133
mrandish wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> then again by the airplane seat itself when the person in front of me reclines their seat. This reminds me of the time I had my laptop open on the tilt-down tray and the very large man in the seat in front just repositioned his girth (not even reclining the seat) but it flexed the seat back enough that my laptop screen was momentarily caught between the tray below and recessed lip above and was almost crushed.

That happened to me when I had an ipad in a standing case and the seat in front cranked back - trapping then pinging the tablet across me and by neighbour's lap. Though the ipad itself wasn't damaged, a couple of glasses didn't make it, and required the steward to try to brush up whatever fragments of glass they could. I feel that airlines are a microcosm of "Do you care about who you actions might affect?" - similar…

[deleted]

Re: The chess bot on Delta Air Lines will destroy you (2024) [video]

#184

Post by baxtr »

vasco wrote: post #171
kimixa wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That happened to me when I had an ipad in a standing case and the seat in front cranked back - trapping then pinging the tablet across me and by neighbour's lap. Though the ipad itself wasn't damaged, a couple of glasses didn't make it, and required the steward to try to brush up whatever fragments of glass they could. I feel that airlines are a microcosm of "Do you care about who you actions might affect?" - similar…

Airlines shouldn't have reclining seats, it's bad design. Blaming people for the bad design is stupid. I never recline and still blame it on the design. Stupid people exist, you should design for that.

It wouldn't surprise me if Ryanair had reclining seats that reclined only if you paid for it.

Re: The chess bot on Delta Air Lines will destroy you (2024) [video]

#185

Post by Dylan16807 »

grogenaut wrote: post #121
CursedSilicon wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was rather disappointed by the internet connection on the Cascades line (going Seattle --> Portland and back). As far as I could tell, they use T-Mobile for backhaul. Who are headquartered in Seattle. Yet the connection barely seemed to work for about half of the journey

boo, it's in the middle of no where along part of the route. Tmobile coverage is mainly in urban areas and along free ways no matter what slingblade tells you on the tv commercial. I don't know if you'd get any coverage on parts of that route other than wired. Just like how sometimes when you're flying over the rockies or into canada you just don't get internets. There's still middles of no where out there. Often not…

Railroads are a great place to run fiber lines, so it wouldn't be hard to set up some towers.

Also starlink.

Re: The chess bot on Delta Air Lines will destroy you (2024) [video]

#186

Post by mcmoor »

reassess_blind wrote: post #170
mcmoor wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard it's never intended to be the same since initial rating for Lichess and chess.com respectively is 1500 and 1200. So they should have 300 rating difference on average. Quite fitting with what the other commenter claims actually.

I don’t think it would average out to a 300 elo difference simply based on the starting rating being 300 apart. If everything else was the same, and people play enough games they will average out to the same elo. The difference is caused by many factors. People don’t play enough games to sink to their real elo, the player pool is different, and you gain/lose fewer points per game with Lichess’s elo algorithm.

ELO is relative. There's no reason why a GM ELO should be 2800 or 280 or 28000. So it's all decided by ELO of every other person. So if the ELO gain/loss calculation and audience of Lichess and chess.com are exactly the same, because of different starting position, I don't think they'd converge to the same ELO but instead will differ by starting position difference.

Also I can't really prove it mathematically but I guess average ELO would also hover on the starting ELO. Because I can't see why it would hover anywhere else and any ELO gained would be lost by someone else.

Re: The chess bot on Delta Air Lines will destroy you (2024) [video]

#187

Post by CalRobert »

vasco wrote: post #171
kimixa wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That happened to me when I had an ipad in a standing case and the seat in front cranked back - trapping then pinging the tablet across me and by neighbour's lap. Though the ipad itself wasn't damaged, a couple of glasses didn't make it, and required the steward to try to brush up whatever fragments of glass they could. I feel that airlines are a microcosm of "Do you care about who you actions might affect?" - similar…

Airlines shouldn't have reclining seats, it's bad design. Blaming people for the bad design is stupid. I never recline and still blame it on the design. Stupid people exist, you should design for that.

Flights from sfo to Frankfurt bolt upright sound unpleasant…

Not to mention that when my wife was pregnant she could barely manage her back pain -with- the recline, never mind without.

The recline button is there for your use. You are welcome to avail of it yourself.

Re: The chess bot on Delta Air Lines will destroy you (2024) [video]

#188

Post by YokoZar »

This reminds me of a bug I reported in 2007 Ubuntu where the default "easy" chess difficulty was too hard. It was eventually fixed in 2014 by using different chess engines. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-chess/+bug/1...

What a world where we have to put significant extra work into making the computer bad enough that a human can compete.

Re: The chess bot on Delta Air Lines will destroy you (2024) [video]

#189

Post by thomc »

mrandish wrote: post #35
woopwoop wrote: post #4

Last time I flew Delta they no longer had this bot, which made me sad. One of my favorite parts of flying was getting absolutely crushed into a tiny cube by the airplane seat's easy chess bot, and then again by the airplane seat itself when the person in front of me reclines their seat.

> then again by the airplane seat itself when the person in front of me reclines their seat. This reminds me of the time I had my laptop open on the tilt-down tray and the very large man in the seat in front just repositioned his girth (not even reclining the seat) but it flexed the seat back enough that my laptop screen was momentarily caught between the tray below and recessed lip above and was almost crushed.

Lost an Apple iBook screen this way. Guy in front slammed his chair back while I was working on a presentation and the screen got caught at the perfect angle to flex it and it died.

Didn't blame him, lesson learned, and I move my own seat back very slowly now.

Re: The chess bot on Delta Air Lines will destroy you (2024) [video]

#190

Post by Dylan16807 »

shadowpho wrote: post #117
TheDong wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To throw a consistent amount of compute at each move, the simple thing to do is give the engine consistent amounts of time per move. The simple thing to do is give it a limit on the total number of states it can explore in its search. If your goal is consistency, wall-clock time makes no sense. If I run 'make -j20', should the chess computer become vastly easier because the CPU is being used to compile, not search?…

>If the goal is consistency, then wall-clock isn't the simple way to do it. It’s simpler than doing a limit on number of states, and for some applications consistency isn’t super important. Doing a time limit also enforces bot moving in a reasonable time. It puts a nice limit to set up a compromise between speed and difficulty. Doing state limit with a time limit might be better way to do it, but is harder.

> It’s simpler than doing a limit on number of states

According to who?

A counter that you ++ each move sounds a lot easier to me than throwing off a separate thread/callback to handle a timer.

> Doing a time limit also enforces bot moving in a reasonable time.

It's designed for specific hardware, and will never have to run on anything significantly slower, but might have to run on things significantly faster. It doesn't need a time cutoff that would only matter in weird circumstances and make it do a weirdly bad move. It needs to be ready for the future.

> It puts a nice limit to set up a compromise between speed and difficulty.

Both methods have that compromise, but using time is way more volatile.

Post reply on HN