<Comment deleted by user>
No doubt the "hysteria" gets blown out of proportion by the uneducated. That being said, after reading the "rant", I'd have to include the OP in that group with his many false assumptions. A blip...? one or two engine users in the many of thousands of games we play? Hardly. Off by miles. The analogies, percentages given are made up fabrications. Illogical comparisons are made between apples and oranges by the OP.
My main concern (like many others) has very little to do with rating points. A vast number of players do not play for points. (Contrary to what many seem to think is the "reason" behind playing the game.) The concern, what becomes upsetting is the expectation of playing another person has been violated. If I want to play an engine, it's simple enough to find one. Cheaters can have their points, but to rob us of our time and expectation of playing another person is the main issue imo. The OP leaves the impression, lose a few points, so what, it's expected, which completely misses players concerns.
The OP obviously is unaware of "detection methods" used and the certainty by which cheaters get tagged. He should educate himself on the topic before throwing out all his wild "hysteria" about players being wrongly accused. He is guilty of the very thing he protests.
I am one of "those who can not see the problem with that sort of analysis" given by the OP. I strongly agree far too many are shouting "cheater" after losing. What is needed is a better education along with learning how to report abusers.
My main concern (like many others) has very little to do with rating points. A vast number of players do not play for points. (Contrary to what many seem to think is the "reason" behind playing the game.) The concern, what becomes upsetting is the expectation of playing another person has been violated. If I want to play an engine, it's simple enough to find one. Cheaters can have their points, but to rob us of our time and expectation of playing another person is the main issue imo. The OP leaves the impression, lose a few points, so what, it's expected, which completely misses players concerns.
The OP obviously is unaware of "detection methods" used and the certainty by which cheaters get tagged. He should educate himself on the topic before throwing out all his wild "hysteria" about players being wrongly accused. He is guilty of the very thing he protests.
I am one of "those who can not see the problem with that sort of analysis" given by the OP. I strongly agree far too many are shouting "cheater" after losing. What is needed is a better education along with learning how to report abusers.
Bookoffourmoves concludes with: "So I think that the hysteria around cheating potentially does more damage than the actual cheating. That's not to say that cheating should be tolerated, but that we should be careful not to destroy the garden trying to remove a few weeds."
If the cheating did not exist in the 1st place, obviously there would be no hysteria that follows. The cheating (weeds) is the root of the problem and therefor causes the most damage. Weeds can become "out of control" and consume the entire garden. A rational approach is required to remove the weeds (which will always pop up the next season). To "look the other way", fearful of the hysteria surrounding the presence of weeds, is not the solution.
The percentage of engine users at Lichess is far less than other sites. At some of the "lesser" chess sites, it's readily apparent the majority of players use engines as there is no detection/prevention. The so-called #1 site has a major issue for several obvious reasons. One attraction of LiChess is it's approach and methods used in dealing with the issue. Hopefully, the phenomenon will be greatly reduced shortly, as the computer programs are still fairly new and their novelty will wear off for the new players.
If the cheating did not exist in the 1st place, obviously there would be no hysteria that follows. The cheating (weeds) is the root of the problem and therefor causes the most damage. Weeds can become "out of control" and consume the entire garden. A rational approach is required to remove the weeds (which will always pop up the next season). To "look the other way", fearful of the hysteria surrounding the presence of weeds, is not the solution.
The percentage of engine users at Lichess is far less than other sites. At some of the "lesser" chess sites, it's readily apparent the majority of players use engines as there is no detection/prevention. The so-called #1 site has a major issue for several obvious reasons. One attraction of LiChess is it's approach and methods used in dealing with the issue. Hopefully, the phenomenon will be greatly reduced shortly, as the computer programs are still fairly new and their novelty will wear off for the new players.
Computer engines are not "new." That depends on your point of view, I suppose. But cheating is not going to go away of its own accord. Rational measures to prevent it, like those employed here, are the best defense.
@bookoffourmoves.
I agree with you here, actually I was thinking of writing a pretty similar post, I don't like cheaters but I don't think it is such a big deal at the end of the day unless you are playing a serious tournament.
I play with good faith on people.
Nonetheless, I also believe that a lot of people are constantly looking for something to get mad, and cheaters are "The economy", or the "it is not my fault I'm losing, it is because of them", of chess.
If you spot a cheater alright, go ahead, report, it is not the end of the world.
I agree with you here, actually I was thinking of writing a pretty similar post, I don't like cheaters but I don't think it is such a big deal at the end of the day unless you are playing a serious tournament.
I play with good faith on people.
Nonetheless, I also believe that a lot of people are constantly looking for something to get mad, and cheaters are "The economy", or the "it is not my fault I'm losing, it is because of them", of chess.
If you spot a cheater alright, go ahead, report, it is not the end of the world.
I disagree with the OP. I do not think that it is worth wasting brain power on whether someone is cheating or not. If you believe that they are cheating, based on some of games they have played, then report them.
I don't even know that there is a cheating hysteria going on in the first place.
If people only knew how sophisticated the anti-cheating measures work. A player delivers thousands of meta data points each game. After a couple of games the fingerprint is more or less clear. At least, up to now.
I agree with bookoffourmoves.
@bookoffourmoves
I agree with almost everything you said but as you can see the majority likes and promotes this kind of climate. A climate of snitching, mob lynching and character assassination. This is not justice! People are accused and their reputation tarnished before they even know what's happening.
Just look at the ignorance of the average member of "chess communities":
@mdinnerspace claims "as the computer programs are still fairly new and their novelty will wear off for the new players"
Computer chess software and hardware has existed since at least the 1970s and was available to the general population in 1980s.
The most famous computer chess engines (stockfish, komodo, houdini) are at least 10 years old. There are hundreds of computer chess engines.
@Sarg0n claims belief on the infallibility of the detection methods, despite the fact he knows very well that detection methods in other areas have also claim infallibility only to have their claims destroyed.
In the end, whatever the method or its accuracy, we don't have any system of checks and balances. We have to trust the methods, the systems and the people who make decisions based on those. Completely opaque systems. Unaccountable. And in these types of problems we shouldn't rely on trust!
Unfortunately and despite our appeals for a more sane behaviour nothing will change. Not until someone accuses Magnus Carlsen of cheating.
I agree with almost everything you said but as you can see the majority likes and promotes this kind of climate. A climate of snitching, mob lynching and character assassination. This is not justice! People are accused and their reputation tarnished before they even know what's happening.
Just look at the ignorance of the average member of "chess communities":
@mdinnerspace claims "as the computer programs are still fairly new and their novelty will wear off for the new players"
Computer chess software and hardware has existed since at least the 1970s and was available to the general population in 1980s.
The most famous computer chess engines (stockfish, komodo, houdini) are at least 10 years old. There are hundreds of computer chess engines.
@Sarg0n claims belief on the infallibility of the detection methods, despite the fact he knows very well that detection methods in other areas have also claim infallibility only to have their claims destroyed.
In the end, whatever the method or its accuracy, we don't have any system of checks and balances. We have to trust the methods, the systems and the people who make decisions based on those. Completely opaque systems. Unaccountable. And in these types of problems we shouldn't rely on trust!
Unfortunately and despite our appeals for a more sane behaviour nothing will change. Not until someone accuses Magnus Carlsen of cheating.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.