The Full Chess Cheating Report of Hans Neiman

Post by bombcar » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 12:28 PM UTC

hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #329

erdevs wrote: post #27

This report provides a detailed background of Hans' potential cheating, and detailed breakdowns of certain aspects of chess.com's cheat-detection methodology, including previously unknown (or little known) methods such as window focus change event monitoring and post-focus-change move analysis.[1] The report also reveals Niemann's engine move correlations alongside over two dozen chess Grandmasters who have admitted…

> The fact that online cheating is so widespread even among top chess players is certainly news to many, including me. A few weeks ago my daughter very proudly announced that she managed to "outsmart" (=hack) her online test app used by her class. I was shocked and asked why she would do that, she's smart enough to get an A without that. She seemed obviously puzzled by my question and my lack of enthusiasm about her…

Post by bombcar » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 12:36 PM UTC

edanm wrote: post #237

maegul wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which gets to my point about the bias of chess.com. Surely they have an interest in making this look like one awful offender, a bad apple essentially, and not that they’re profits come from a broken sport.

Err, if that was their interest, why did they even include the new-to-many info about other top GMs having admitted cheating? They could have just not included that part at all.

Post by swores » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 12:38 PM UTC

rowanG077 wrote: post #342

barrkel wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

7ms isn't going to be the bar. Human reaction times are in the 150+ms range, you have 20x your budget. I agree it's still tough though, most I/O paths on generic hardware will have buffers at every step that you'll have to fight to eliminate.

7ms is enough. But that is one in a chain of latencies. 150ms is way too long if you want your trigger to be effective. In 150ms the enemy has moved out of your crosshair. Humans deal with that with dynamic adjustment but the AI will just click the mouse. I'd think you'd need to hit less then 25ms end to end and even that might not be enough for far away targets.

Post by Orothrim » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 12:39 PM UTC

jsnell wrote: post #15

Releasing Exhibit C seems like a huge lapse in judgement from chess.com; they've supposedly redacted it, but there's so much information there that it has to be completely trivial to deanonymize. Like, just how many of the people with a 2700+ rating played in chess.com money tournaments until suddenly creating a new account in July 2020 and then didn't play in such tournaments for a year. If that still doesn't narrow…

Post by ZiiS » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 12:41 PM UTC

edanm wrote: post #238

maegul wrote: post #5

So page 9 from the last paragraph is interesting. Chess.com basically indicate that apart from Hans, a number of highly rated players (including higher than Hans) have been caught and admitted to cheating. I haven't gone over the report thoroughly, but it's clearly focused on Hans's conduct and not so much on the state of play regarding online cheating, which is, even by Magnus's statement, the chief focus of all of…

> Third, chess.com have a conflict of interest in this meta-discussion, I presume, as they have commercial interests in the survival of online chess. How is this a conflict of interest? It's just regular old interest. They are interested in Chess continuing to grow.