lichess.org
Donate

Computers have literally killed chess

@Supergamer1234 said in #19:

I guess the real culprit is...

just admit that this article is disrespectful and agenda-laden. lol.

@Supergamer1234 said in #19: > I guess the real culprit is... just admit that this article is disrespectful and agenda-laden. lol.

anyway everyone need to say what they need to say. By the way the beautiful draws into a big paint could decorate chess club ... His draws are unique what a hidden picasso talent here !

anyway everyone need to say what they need to say. By the way the beautiful draws into a big paint could decorate chess club ... His draws are unique what a hidden picasso talent here !

"there is no accomplishment in chess that cannot now be tarnished by the insinuation of computer use, for it is a charge practically impossible to disprove".

It is the same with sports and doping, music performers and post-prod manipulation, etc... not that technology is bad, but it has enabled a lot of haters to establish and rule a toxic trollarchy. A side effect normal people should learn to cope with.

> "there is no accomplishment in chess that cannot now be tarnished by the insinuation of computer use, for it is a charge practically impossible to disprove". It is the same with sports and doping, music performers and post-prod manipulation, etc... not that technology is bad, but it has enabled a lot of haters to establish and rule a toxic trollarchy. A side effect normal people should learn to cope with.

@OctoPinky said in #24:

It is the same with sports and doping, music performers and post-prod manipulation, etc... not that technology is bad, but it has enabled a lot of haters to establish and rule a toxic trollarchy. A side effect normal people should learn to cope with.

Alas, A lot of the people I most respect and admire are not normal.

That said, yes, doping has indeed ruined a lot of sports. They still exist, of course, but the damage is obvious. Synthetic music has not exactly ruined music but has marginalized a lot of things I love about music (live performances, human performers), and I expect that with the rise of AI music generation the roles of humans within popular music (which is almost entirely electronic/electronically enhanced) will be similarly diminished. I suppose this would be quite sad, but society seems to have thoroughly preconditioned us to this artless world that we barely notice the change.

  • Z.
@OctoPinky said in #24: > It is the same with sports and doping, music performers and post-prod manipulation, etc... not that technology is bad, but it has enabled a lot of haters to establish and rule a toxic trollarchy. A side effect normal people should learn to cope with. Alas, A lot of the people I most respect and admire are not normal. That said, yes, doping has indeed ruined a lot of sports. They still exist, of course, but the damage is obvious. Synthetic music has not exactly ruined music but has marginalized a lot of things I love about music (live performances, human performers), and I expect that with the rise of AI music generation the roles of humans within popular music (which is almost entirely electronic/electronically enhanced) will be similarly diminished. I suppose this would be quite sad, but society seems to have thoroughly preconditioned us to this artless world that we barely notice the change. - Z.

@ZugAddict said in #25:

Alas, A lot of the people I most respect and admire are not normal.

Yes, bad word choice... not only English is not my native language, I actually never learned it properly. Should have written "non troll people".

I was already thinking about AI, which undoubtedly is going to make worse this problem.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

@ZugAddict said in #25: > Alas, A lot of the people I most respect and admire are not normal. Yes, bad word choice... not only English is not my native language, I actually never learned it properly. Should have written "non troll people". I was already thinking about AI, which undoubtedly is going to make worse this problem. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

And then there's databases. You can't go play a chess tournament anymore wihtout some kid and his coach reviewing every game you've ever played for six hours before it even starts.

And then there's databases. You can't go play a chess tournament anymore wihtout some kid and his coach reviewing every game you've ever played for six hours before it even starts.

@dpcarballo said in #27:

And then there's databases. You can't go play a chess tournament anymore wihtout some kid and his coach reviewing every game you've ever played for six hours before it even starts.

this is a good thing for competition. it means more people are "on the level". what are you complaining about? we made chess free and accessible. god. these arguments and this article annoy me so much.

@dpcarballo said in #27: > And then there's databases. You can't go play a chess tournament anymore wihtout some kid and his coach reviewing every game you've ever played for six hours before it even starts. this is a good thing for competition. it means more people are "on the level". what are you complaining about? we made chess free and accessible. god. these arguments and this article annoy me so much.

a long diatribe of "back in my day." And the dangers are constantly acknowledged - so, before you write a rant, I don't know - keep up?

the only constant is change. and charisma and charm have always and ever been the part of any culture, prey to skill and idealism - that is not "new" as you so casually posit here. There have always been charming but inept kings, rhetorically skilled but philosophically empty politicians and philosophers (Socrates's trial, anyone?), as well as cheats and thieves.

And the computer age, the internet age, and now the AI age has made chess more and more susceptible to that, as it has so many other fields. And we've all acknowledged that.

And, another age-old habit of good ol' day pieces is whining masked as social commentary. Have an alternative? A solution? A new approach. Give us that than some weak, "gee golly gosh whiz we ought to recognize this!"

a long diatribe of "back in my day." And the dangers are constantly acknowledged - so, before you write a rant, I don't know - keep up? the only constant is change. and charisma and charm have always and ever been the part of any culture, prey to skill and idealism - that is not "new" as you so casually posit here. There have always been charming but inept kings, rhetorically skilled but philosophically empty politicians and philosophers (Socrates's trial, anyone?), as well as cheats and thieves. And the computer age, the internet age, and now the AI age has made chess more and more susceptible to that, as it has so many other fields. And we've all acknowledged that. And, another age-old habit of good ol' day pieces is whining masked as social commentary. Have an alternative? A solution? A new approach. Give us that than some weak, "gee golly gosh whiz we ought to recognize this!"

This is a thought provoking and moving blog, and I feel compelled to reply @ZugAddict.

You gesture to computers as the culprit, that on the surface is true but I think there is more to the story.

The problem with technology as discussed here is first and foremost "interpassivity", when we outsource our capacities for excellence to the computer, the robot, the AI. Yes, some of that is designed to make us interpassive. But it is also the culture surrounding technology which is as important as what it can do for us. People are no longer willing to strive because they don't have to, but it's in that striving that we find the meaning of chess.

We don't get stronger by avoiding the recalcitrance of the chess position with all it's hidden intricacies and quirks and pressure points. We get better by understanding it, by finding the balance of the dialectic, by immersing ourselves in the struggle of the game and exerting ourselves to what looks like victory, but the true goal of chess is that dialectic itself—the constant striving for exellence.

The second, is that people are no longer are wise in the substantial sense—what is right, what is good, what is true. Yet we are overflowing with information and have zero idea what to do it with. We're taught to be entitied to our subjectivity, our preferences over commitment to good faith and community.

Third, the consumeristic mass culture of society which primes us for extraction over generation of robust goods has to do with the devolution of chess from the ideal dialectic of striving engagement.

This is a thought provoking and moving blog, and I feel compelled to reply @ZugAddict. You gesture to computers as the culprit, that on the surface is true but I think there is more to the story. The problem with technology as discussed here is first and foremost "interpassivity", when we outsource our capacities for excellence to the computer, the robot, the AI. Yes, some of that is designed to make us interpassive. But it is also the culture surrounding technology which is as important as what it can do for us. People are no longer willing to strive because they don't have to, but it's in that striving that we find the meaning of chess. We don't get stronger by avoiding the recalcitrance of the chess position with all it's hidden intricacies and quirks and pressure points. We get better by understanding it, by finding the balance of the dialectic, by immersing ourselves in the struggle of the game and exerting ourselves to what looks like victory, but the true goal of chess is that dialectic itself—the constant striving for exellence. The second, is that people are no longer are wise in the substantial sense—what is right, what is good, what is true. Yet we are overflowing with information and have zero idea what to do it with. We're taught to be entitied to our subjectivity, our preferences over commitment to good faith and community. Third, the consumeristic mass culture of society which primes us for extraction over generation of robust goods has to do with the devolution of chess from the ideal dialectic of striving engagement.