a question about BOT accounts

im pretty much want a bot account its fun and stuff but before i want to ask if the information the bot generates (i mean ex the moves it generates when it plays on the lichess platform) -ex leela.exe witch is running on my computer witch is the host- does the information go to lichess from my computer directly or through the browser I use? because it would be more secure for me if it went through the browser e.x. the bot running on my pc and sends the info into the browser usuage witch comes to lichess. so im really not sure. i hope i didn't ask confusing stuff...

ty!

If you use this one:

github.com/careless25/lichess-uci-bot

it will directly communicate with the lichess servers and your browser has nothing to do with it. Lichess doesnt want to harm your computer, this is safe.

Is this new bot play similar to what ICC does? Also...Does a bot program serve to reduce engine cheating? I think it may provide an outlet for engine/chess players to test their engine tweaking, and get a bot rating ...instead of using engines against humans. :]

@Abyssinia

Unfortunately, No, providing the ability to manage a bot does not ameliorate the desire for people to cheat. The desire for people to cheat is dependent upon an individual's ego and psyche. (It'll still happen.)

Most people who use engines or bots don't actually know how to "tweak" things for a performance advantage. The performance advantage is deeply embedded, far beyond the average user's ability to comprehend such things. Automation of "bots" is trivial compared to actually tweaking software (including neural nets) for performance. Everyone using a "bot" is using an automated system with a designated software binary or neural-net checkpoint to manage it.

@MrCharles i disagree, @Abyssinia i agree

If the usage of engine assistance gets legalized in the form of bots then this will reduce the amount of cheaters, thats my opinion. The logic behind is, if a human can do what he desires, using a legal variant, then he will prefer to do so.

@nh78

And when an individual can't perform up-to-par with someone else? You don't think that someone will turn to an engine to improve his or her own perceived performance?

I'll give you this: It is novel and interesting for a short period to setup a bot. But, measure one's own performance compared to that bot ... in the lacking sense of not improving beyond a certain point. You don't think people will justify the use of an engine (of sorts) in perceived improvement against other individuals (against, or versus ... bot v. bot)?

I think you might be mistaking some core tenets of psychology.

Lets put it in some other risk versus reward terms: Could you use a bot to cheat a Casino at the tables? Or, lets say, you used a bot, online, to play Poker against other Poker bots... knowing the same statistical (and counted) rules of the game.

Sure, allowing individuals who only have an interest in using a bot to compete (against other bots, not humans, or, let's say a bot in disguise of a human, as in current cheating terms, meaning and paradigm) ... will be happy to setup a bot to beat his or her own opponent(s) in that given capacity.

What about someone who can't handle defeat at the hands of another human? You don't think these people will still try to cheat on the down-low (try not to be detected, just because we now have the ability to automate bots -- you think people's little ego mechanism will somehow change with the advent of new technology, not that it hasn't changed in past purpose over past improvements)???

Food for thought. Enjoy your own cup of (poisoned) tea.

I think this single phrase says it alone, as it pertains to HUMAN psychology:

>> "the ability to manage a bot does not ameliorate the desire for people to cheat"

But, of course, you can argue against that statement all-day. Until you're blue in the face. Just won't waste your breath trying to convince me that people's minds will change ... just because a website allows the automation of chess-playing bots to compete against each other (if this is or becomes the case).

ok. I wont :-)