In my opinion, in the near future, artificial intelligence could be used as an ally of chess sites, in a useful way against cheating : the almost infinite learning and memorization capabilities of AI could help mods detect most difficult cases or to identify even more quickly. Fortunately, this will not replace the work of mods, but it could serve the purpose of confirmation and advanced detection.
Sadly semi cheating is not rare. Yesterday a player played 86 moves in 36 seconds with no blunder and lose at the end. Reasons ? Cheating is everywhere on internet site games not only chess. Maybe a new online culture.
A cheater is a cracker's beta tester. Stop talking about fairness, it's not about chess. It's about money.
I'd like to keep the discussion on a technical level. Any ideas about what I asked in my messages, particularly #33? Anybody?
@HCB1983 said in #47:
> @Nomoreusernames
> Very rude, very cocky, very misleading comments.
I thought you were a club player with interest in the topic, but with this post you confirm that you are a moron with no idea, and no interest to learn.
>Like that of a teenager which you might be (I hope so).
I am an informed adult who is more than willing to address your idiocy.
> Insulting in a forum is not brave nor intelligent.
That may be the case, but I do happen to be brave. Remember, you are the one throwing around insults, I am rebutting them.
>It 's not brave because you do not put yourself on the line.
Everyone online should protect their privacy. Those being paid to be online may have incentives to be dishonest.
>It ' s not intelligent because you resort to that when you lose an argument.
You have lied and your argument has been shown to be ridiculous, counter to reason and the facts. I have not made an argument.
>You mystify, talk about Kaladin, Mathsy stuff you claim to know.
I lead you to it, so you can look into it and understand how your claims were wrong.
>More simple than that. Reason and scientific method (common sense in the hood):
Reason and scientific method are not common sense. You are using words the clever people use without knowing what they mean.
>put a couple of engine moves in your game (let' say four,three, five), its obvious that that goes undetected.
A couple means 2, but you've listed 3 moves. You literally don't know the first thing you are talking about. You haven't even bothered to look at the resources offered to you to begin to understand what you loud-mouthing off about. This is not only ignorance, it's also stupidity.
>Only a naive "mathsy" guy, who has a very undistinguished "carreer' in lichess
I have no career at Lichess, but I am a professional if that's what you are trying to say.
>can claim that that goes detected
Yes, it "goes detected" if that's the way you choose to understand it. It doesn't really matter which number on the list it is, they don't need to go to the effort of picking which engine someone is using. You seemed to have missed any previous diiscussion about cheating, because I struggle to believe you are stupid enough to have not understood a single thing.
>(i know, you watch videos of chess detection, somehow you believe that makes you proficient on the subject).
I have some knowledge on the subject, whereas you are completely ignorant.
>It' a dogmatic behaviour associated with heavy posters,
Dogma is when you presume something, but when given a chance to find out the truth, you rather ignore the facts and stick with your presumption. You have dogma. And you have provided not a single fact to the questions you have been asked.
>Like Cedur (the mod hater also the wanna-be-modder),
Please provide the comment where Cedur is a "mod-hater"
brianE (cheat denialist
Whom that is a cheater, has BrianE denied cheated?
>and poster on morals like you
I don't think of myself as particularly moralistic, I just like to reveal when someone lies.
>and some other hundred folks.
Everyone else on the forum then?
>Well, you claimed in another post that you were outraged by Niemann' treatment, you believe he is legit,
Science thinks Niemann didn't cheat in the games he was accused by Carlsen.
>Wrong again.
Well show us.
>you also give beef to Carlsen, Naka because how they mocked him.
I am disappointed with Carlsen for not apologising when he was shown to have falsely accused someone. I am also disgusted by Hikaru- not for mocking Niemann- but for knowingly proclaiming false sexually deviant allegations about a teenager. These actions are below acceptable for any adult.
>Pal, you have opinions for everything,
I don't have any opinion of 99% of posts on this forum, but those which are deceitful and detrimental, I do. And that's the purpose of a forum, to have ideas challenged. I take up against things which are malevolent, and if they are not, then I learn.
>cannot hold arguments,
I am not holding an argument, I am countering your arguments.
>and have a general bad faith.
I have excellent faith, which is why I took the time to explain to you when you are wrong.
> Well, let's see the positive side.
First you have to learn to see
>Whenever I am out of Bill burr or david chapelle material i can always go you your post history, to laught at you ability to get ridiculed week after week.
If the truth is ridiculed, it is not the truth which should be embarrassed.
>I recommend it to everyone who is bored of kitten videos.
So definitely not videos which offer you understanding about cheat detection then?
> Best regards to every annoyed heavy poster!!!
You're thinking of them in the wrong way, think of them more as "less-ignorant" posters.
@MarkIorio said in #53:
> A cheater is a cracker's beta tester. Stop talking about fairness, it's not about chess. It's about money.
> I'd like to keep the discussion on a technical level. Any ideas about what I asked in my messages, particularly #33? Anybody?
Why the differentiation for the earphone rules for the events on chess.corn? I expect that chess.corn are trying to earn money and popularity with twitch viewers, and most of the streamers think it's cool to look like a DJ?
@Nomoreusernames said in #55:
> I expect that chess.corn are trying to earn money and popularity with twitch viewers, and most of the streamers think it's cool to look like a DJ?
If so:
1) Why don't they allow headphones at all events?
2) Why do they still bother mandating cameras, since headphones make cameras completely useless for cheat detection?
@MarkIorio said in #56:
> If so:
> 1) Why don't they allow headphones at all events?
There could be an element of professionalism that they wish to convey for some events.
> 2) Why do they still bother mandating cameras, since headphones make cameras completely useless for cheat detection?
Not actually completely useless, but if you mean "still possible", then yes. Chess.corn have shown that they care more about their earnings than that the competition is fair.
@Nomoreusernames said in #57:
> > >2) Why do they still bother mandating cameras, since headphones make cameras completely useless for cheat detection?
>
> Not actually completely useless, but if you mean "still possible", then yes.
Beats me. A cheater could even prefer hearing the bot's moves rather than seeing them on the board, even with no cameras.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.