I like both. Chess.com does have good news articles.
@SeniorPatzer said in #32:
> I like both. Chess.com does have good news articles.
Well not news, but i remember a silman article
Pawnfork an underestimated weapon or something along that line
> I like both. Chess.com does have good news articles.
Well not news, but i remember a silman article
Pawnfork an underestimated weapon or something along that line
It takes two to tango.
@schlawg said in #34:
> There's no resistance to that on our side. Lichess source code is open.
Than where is the point in the project if you geht captured by the worst of capitalism. Why even start lichess?
> There's no resistance to that on our side. Lichess source code is open.
Than where is the point in the project if you geht captured by the worst of capitalism. Why even start lichess?
@Brian-E said in #15:
> That's true and a good example of the difference I sense, which is that chessdotcom feels it has to implement anything for which there is popular demand despite often not really being able to do it properly. On chessdotcom players want to see moves automatically labelled as good or brilliant so they must have their way. On lichess.org our intelligence isn't insulted and it is explained to us why chess software is unable to label moves as good from a human perspective, or only with enormous technical difficulties, so we can better do without it.
In the entire time I used chess.com, I don't recall ever having been awarded the accolade of brilliant move for any of my skewers.
> That's true and a good example of the difference I sense, which is that chessdotcom feels it has to implement anything for which there is popular demand despite often not really being able to do it properly. On chessdotcom players want to see moves automatically labelled as good or brilliant so they must have their way. On lichess.org our intelligence isn't insulted and it is explained to us why chess software is unable to label moves as good from a human perspective, or only with enormous technical difficulties, so we can better do without it.
In the entire time I used chess.com, I don't recall ever having been awarded the accolade of brilliant move for any of my skewers.
@ineedthedough said in #36:
> Than where is the point in the project if you geht captured by the worst of capitalism. Why even start lichess?
If not for the "suckers" who strive to improve things for others with no thought of their own reward, all of our lives would be very different. We would be fully owned by the capital class rather than mostly. And the difference between fully and mostly is vast.
> Than where is the point in the project if you geht captured by the worst of capitalism. Why even start lichess?
If not for the "suckers" who strive to improve things for others with no thought of their own reward, all of our lives would be very different. We would be fully owned by the capital class rather than mostly. And the difference between fully and mostly is vast.
<Comment deleted by user>
@schlawg said in #38:
> If not for the "suckers" who strive to improve things for others with no thought of their own reward, all of our lives would be very different. We would be fully owned by the capital class rather than mostly. And the difference between fully and mostly is vast.
Anyhow thx For the worj
> If not for the "suckers" who strive to improve things for others with no thought of their own reward, all of our lives would be very different. We would be fully owned by the capital class rather than mostly. And the difference between fully and mostly is vast.
Anyhow thx For the worj
@schlawg said in #38:
> If not for the "suckers" who strive to improve things for others with no thought of their own reward, all of our lives would be very different. We would be fully owned by the capital class rather than mostly. And the difference between fully and mostly is vast.
l'm one of them suckers. And I'd say the smug satisfaction I know I created something that went globally viral even if I'm not making grubby cash from it feels great every morning when I wake up.
> If not for the "suckers" who strive to improve things for others with no thought of their own reward, all of our lives would be very different. We would be fully owned by the capital class rather than mostly. And the difference between fully and mostly is vast.
l'm one of them suckers. And I'd say the smug satisfaction I know I created something that went globally viral even if I'm not making grubby cash from it feels great every morning when I wake up.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.