Live data from Hacker News

Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

incoherency.co.uk

201–210 of 262 posts

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#201
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1981206 (a blitz to be compared against https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=2372960 from 2 days ago).

Good catch. I was searching for a game without Nf3, but this is effectively a transposition. One minor point folks aren't mentioning that I think works in Neimann's favor - Carlsen is known for enjoying the Catalan, and the opening in the game was essentially a Nimzo/Catalan hybrid. This fact makes Neimann's supposed pre-game prep a bit more palatable. Everything else (postgame interview, past history, Twitter antics…

Did Magnus ever played 6.a3 line before in this well known Nimzo variant? The Game with So doesn't have it.

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#202

Though I'm not much of a poker player myself, I am friends with many professionals who have found success both online and offline, in games from pot-limit omaha to no-limit hold-em. Cheating in online poker has been around for many years, with varying success by online gaming companies to implement anti-cheat measures in their software. With recent developments in AI, there is renewed discussion about cheating as the…

"I'm not sure how the world will respond."

Naked poker/chess etc...

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#203

This is relevant to today's events because Magnus Carlsen just withdrew from a tournament[1] after yesterday's loss to a significantly lower rated opponent who had previously been suspended for cheating on chess.com. The tournament organizers have also implemented additional anti-cheating protocols starting today. Whatever comes out of these accusations, the chess world will sure enjoy its new infusion of drama. [1]…

I know very little about chess. Do computers play like top humans? Or different stylistically? ie - if you were a top player and looking at the moves of an opponent, could you discern if the style was more similar to a top rated human or a top rated computer?

Agadmator covered this game and explains a disgusting computer line quite well. Note that under time pressure, a human can only calculate so many lines. They will immediately see a range of possible good lines, explore them to some depth and choose the best looking one. This engine line takes a bad looking path which comes good only after 19 moves.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64o62MrhvXc&t=1400s

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#204
post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are now using a 15 minute delay to avoid outside communication. Jamming signals is also entirely possible.

The method in this article uses no outside communication or signalling at all

But the Moon Ribas example requires outside communication, I'm just saying that it seems possible to prevent using that effectively.

As for electronics, I assume most can be detected ? Maybe implants might pose a problem ?

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#205

Though I'm not much of a poker player myself, I am friends with many professionals who have found success both online and offline, in games from pot-limit omaha to no-limit hold-em. Cheating in online poker has been around for many years, with varying success by online gaming companies to implement anti-cheat measures in their software. With recent developments in AI, there is renewed discussion about cheating as the…

Which AI has beat humans at poker? I'm curious as I just heard a guest on Lex Fridman's podcast say differently... I'm not up to speed with that realm

Not really related to AI but it gives quite an advantage if you can connect multiple "players" to same table. It is not worth to do it without some kind of automation and service providers try to prevent it from happening.

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#206

Though I'm not much of a poker player myself, I am friends with many professionals who have found success both online and offline, in games from pot-limit omaha to no-limit hold-em. Cheating in online poker has been around for many years, with varying success by online gaming companies to implement anti-cheat measures in their software. With recent developments in AI, there is renewed discussion about cheating as the…

In my circle of friends I have one or two that will take the option to cheat, to this day. This was fine during school days, but, as an adult, I question the behaviour.

This is at cards (Bridge) and Scrabble with some quick hands of normal card games if there is a break or insufficient time for a 'Bridge Rubber'.

My counter strategy is to win fairly and squarely. My cheating friends are obligated to spend a lot of effort planning the cheat and not getting caught. After the sleight of hand they also need to monitor the table to make sure nobody has noticed. They also need to be watching for others cheating.

With Scrabble in particular, total focus on the task in hand is, for me, a much better strategy. The dopamine hit is being able to lay down all the letters, calmly and without commotion, to get maximum points, doing it again on the next round from a fresh rack of letters. This can be done with an 'open' game, where opportunities are given to competitors instead of made a priority to deny. Done well, this feels like you have just put together e=mc2 each play.

Because of gambling mentality, the stakes get higher and higher. I am not in it for the money and feel troubled by taking what was other people's money from the table, more so if they cheat because I feel sorry for them. If it is a legitimate game then the stakes are representative of the situation, the prize can be fairly claimed.

Of consequence is reputation. If you cheat and lose then that is going to be remembered by your peers for decades. However, if you play a monster game where people you have not played before start out with the assumption that they are just going to be battered, then that reputation is short lived. Which is good because people will still play you, even the cheats.

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is false. If there's a longer mate where every move from your opponent is forced (that is, only one more is legal or doesn't immediately lose) a human player will play that, as opposed to a shorter mate, in say 5 moves, where you have all sorts of different cases to calculate depending on what your opponent plays.

You should be more careful with such statements. Boldly claiming that something is 'false' and backing it up with a rather vague hypotheticals does not make your statement look good, considering that said hypotheticals are not supported by my own chess playing experience. Of course, I don't claim to be a really strong player or something, and my lichess rapid rating is only ~2580, so maybe your expertize in these mat…

That's a serious lichess rapid rating. Are you a titled player?

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, those are the make believe games that Dan Bilzerian loves to boast about.

There are certainly games with $10m+ on the table in total. I’m sure there have been 9 figure pots, if not 10, but not every single hand.

I highly doubt that there have been 9 figure pots.

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should be more careful with such statements. Boldly claiming that something is 'false' and backing it up with a rather vague hypotheticals does not make your statement look good, considering that said hypotheticals are not supported by my own chess playing experience. Of course, I don't claim to be a really strong player or something, and my lichess rapid rating is only ~2580, so maybe your expertize in these mat…

That's a serious lichess rapid rating. Are you a titled player?

I don't think so. I only started playing online a couple of years ago to relax, but ~30 years ago I used to go to chess school for a few years and had a First class sportsman degree [0], and even barely qualified for a Candidate for Master of Sport after a couple of local tournaments, but it wasn't awarded to me because I simply stopped appearing: it coincided with me losing interest in chess as time limits on that level grew to ~2+ hours and that was far too much for my jumpy ass. So I don't think that First class title is still active, as even the country that awarded it to me - USSR - doesn't exist any more.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Sports_Classification_...

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#210
post #188

Is there a precise, published-in-advance definition of cheating in the chess contest rules, or are the contest organizers allowed to shift goalposts as they see fit, and ban a player from future contests because of any arbitrary reason they come up with? My naïve definition would be: a player was probably not cheating if they would have been able to come up with the same moves even if they had played in an isolated r…

Yes, if it's a FIDE tournament, there is a precise definition about what is allowed. Of course, this will be applied as interpreted by the arbiters.

12.3 a. During play the players are forbidden to make use of any notes, sources of information or advice, or analyse on another chessboard.

12.3 b. Without the permission of the arbiter a player is forbidden to have a mobile phone or other electronic means of communication in the playing venue, unless they are completely switched off. If any such device produces a sound, the player shall lose the game. The opponent shall win. However, if the opponent cannot win the game by any series of legal moves, his score shall be a draw.

Post reply on HN