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

Dear Chess World

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 1001 posts

Re: Dear Chess World

#591

Post by armchairhacker »

kjerkegor wrote: post #176
armchairhacker wrote: post #131

What i think should happen is, Hans should play in tournaments which have much more security, and play against Magnus. If he did cheat it should be really obvious because his performance will suddenly drop. If he didn’t than he will play the same, but now with the added security he won’t have to face unbacked accusations, and there is no excuse for Magnus to refuse to play with Hans like he has been doing now. Even i…

> If he did cheat it should be really obvious because his performance will suddenly drop I mean, Magnus is so much more better player than Hans that even if Hans didn't cheat he would probably be worse in rematch. But in all sports sometimes underdogs win. In couple yt videos i watched it was said that Magnus played bad game and that Hans already gained an advantage in opening. Hans said that he prepared opening play…

Maybe he will get away with it if he only cheated against Magnus, and only in that one match. Because it's perfectly reasonable for him to play against Magnus many more times and lost.

But if he cheated a lot more (as Magnus seems to allege) then he'll also lose to others he used to beat easily.

EDIT: I think a big issue with chess is this "perfection" mentality. Magnus cannot make a single mistake or lose a single game without it being a big show. Hans beating Magnus this one time, even though he was playing against black, should basically mean nothing - Magnus can probably beat Hans 10 times over. If Hans was beating Magnus 10 times it would be different - but also if he was on a streak to Magnus 10 times he would be playing with a lot more scrutiny.

Re: Dear Chess World

#592

Post by hervature »

pphysch wrote: post #532
dorkwood wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was younger, I spent many, many hours playing one particular video game. I became a “known cheater” at the game, despite never actually cheating (I’d cheated at other games in my early teens, but had since given up that lifestyle). I can recall several players on discussion boards analysing my statistics and explaining how I was clearly cheating because it was impossible for a human to play like me. Humans, th…

Chess is not some random online video game though

No post body was provided.

Re: Dear Chess World

#593

Post by bombcar »

roflyear wrote: post #357
ouid wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The largest state that we have successfully managed to isolate from communication with the rest of the universe is on the order of 15 qubits. I think you do not appreciate just how easy it is to get information through a channel. Or rather how difficult it would be to prove that such a channel was used. This is, however, irrelevant. Hans Niemann is a chess cheat. Allowing him to set the narrative to "I've only cheate…

Quoted post unavailable.

If I got trespassed for shoplifting at 12 and again at 16 I wouldn’t blink twice if the store banned me at 19.

Re: Dear Chess World

#594

Post by mhaymo »

qq66 wrote: post #569

This is way too much accusation without any evidence, and a terrible blow to Carlsen's sterling reputation. What he should have said was: "Niemann is an admitted chess cheater, and has cheated even more than he has admitted to, per Chess.com's recent statement. Cheating destroys the game and I refuse to play against known cheaters. I will not play Hans Niemann or any other known cheaters."

Except he did play him, and only after that loss did he withdraw from the tournament and refuse to play with him again. The implication is clear to all that Carlsen suspects foul play in that game, I don't see the point in being coy about that now.

Re: Dear Chess World

#595

Post by asimpletune »

lvl102 wrote: post #394
stephc_int13 wrote: post #135

Magnus is not doing this in the best possible way. If Hans is cheating (possible, especially given his past) Magnus should act and use his connections in the Chess world to catch him cheating. Suspicion is not proof. Using his reputation as leverage can work to destroy Hans's reputation, but there is a high risk of collateral damages. He should be smarter than that.

How do you think he can accomplish that exactly? You think they’re going to install hidden cameras everywhere?

I guess one way, it would be unethical but bear with me, is to wait until there is a very important, must-win scenario for Hans. Then, you have him think he's playing his opponent, but really he's playing Stockfish 15.

If he draws, he's cheating.

I know it's unethical, but what I'm saying is it's not impossible to catch someone cheating. Another idea I had is to telegraph different moves from a game, to a live broadcast. Imagine they just show their faces and then a 2d diagram of the board. Then you see what happens to his play. This only works assuming he's not using an implant or a thumper in his shoe.

Re: Dear Chess World

#596

Post by runarberg »

nonethewiser wrote: post #316
erdevs wrote: post #97

A key fact to understand in thinking about cheating in over the board chess: a strong player can defeat a much stronger opponent with just 1-3 hints per game indicating the strongest move. For example, most chess experts agree that a ~2600 rated player with 2-3 hints at key moments per game would be expected to beat a ~2800 rated player. Many people might assume that a cheater needs guidance every move, thereby requi…

> (or Niemann, if concrete evidence against him emerges) This window seems closed though. Carlsen seems to have no evidence. Where else could the evidence come from? All we have is character attacks. Even if justified, they can't prove that he cheated. All we know for sure is that Carlsen accused him of cheating with no evidence.

Not quite. There is still a possibility that Niemann will admit cheating. If he actually cheated there may be a time—in years or decades rather then months—that he fills with remorse and admits it (hopefully with a detailed description on how he did it so we can verify). If however he didn’t cheat, we will probably never actually know the truth.

Re: Dear Chess World

#597

Post by Tostino »

gpm wrote: post #578
walrus01 wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need something that transmits if you're searching for bug-like devices or any general integrated circuits with a nonlinear junction detector: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_junction_detector I am very far removed from anything related to Chess, but if they want to get serious about this they should hire people who specialize in the federal-contracting adjacent field of TSCM (technical surveillance…

That's a fascinating device. Wouldn't putting the electronics inside a conductive case hide them from it? Maybe it's hard to get an antenna out if you do that though?

The wiki said that it doesn't work against shielded electronics, however who knows how accurate that actually is. I really enjoyed the anecdote about the US embassy in Moscow having diodes embedded in the cement throughout to make finding actual bugs much harder.

Re: Dear Chess World

#598

Post by Havoc »

hughw wrote: post #548

A search of these comments reveals possibly the first violation of Godwin's Law ever recorded.

I hereby posit that there may need to be an addendum: For the purposes of Godwin’s law Hans may be deemed equivalent to Nazi.

You know:

>Hans get ze Flammenwerfer

Re: Dear Chess World

#599

Post by Raidion »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #519
squeaky-clean wrote: post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just "e6" would likely be enough context in most situations. Sometimes only one piece can legally move there. Sometimes it's obvious which piece should move there once the position is pointed out.

I watched the livestreams of Andrea Botez's games in Vegas. Something I was really struck by is even though she's not a GM strength player, her mental board visualization skills are way up there. She did post game debriefs on the streams where she went rapid fire through hundreds of variations with her cohost just verbally. She'd go through them faster than the host could click to show chat at times. Now imagine what…

You don't have to imagine, check out any post match press conference or when players discuss over the board after the game.

They remember all the variations they consider, and they've considered most of the variations their opponents have calculated, so the variations aren't new branches, they're just pointers to spots in the game tree both players have in their heads.

Re: Dear Chess World

#600

Post by flyax »

epolanski wrote: post #307
jdthedisciple wrote: post #216

I believe people might be seriously underestimating just how good Magnus may be at detecting cheating. Dude probably trains with computers regularly. He has a better memory than 10 average Joe's combined. He's been the absolute #1 of the world for what, 10 years now? He wouldn't risk his whole reputation for nothing. I personally take his suspicions very seriously, though I agree that evidence has to be presented soo…

Hans is known to have cheated, his coach is known to have cheated, add low security in the event, Hans beating Magnus (a player two tiers above him) on black pieces (Magnus has lost only 15 games against black in an entire world champion career) and Hans acting suspicious during the game and here we are.

chess.com suggests Hans cheated more than he admits. He did (much?) better in tournaments with zero delay. In a few consecutive tournaments, he made a lot of top engine moves, slightly above Magnus/Kasparov/Fisher at their best. He had a hard time explaining his lines in the interview after the game (with Firouzja I think).
Post reply on HN