|
I am going to check this site out this weekend, for sure. I have seen it mentioned in other forums too. I think they don't have any bots to play/practice with and chess.com does, but a lot of it is the same.
|
|
|
|
|
I enjoy chess on chess.com and on lichess.org
I am usually surprised at the analysis after the game where I see moves that I might-have-done-if-only. That's where most of my learning happens, seeing my mistakes, especially the subtle ones. (Blunders I usually realize right away!)
I feel that I'm getting better (my ratings go up gradually). I doubt I'll ever excel, but it's fun, plus it's like exercise for concentration.
|
|
|
|
|
The analysis is amazing, at least for beginners like me. I try to play bots for now, unassisted, and then see how many blunders and mistakes I made. nice.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. invite me as pk06 - willing to play a game. (allow 5-7 days/move, not 10-minute games).
Peter.
|
|
|
|
|
I've been playing since 2016 and am currently in the grueling 35,000 player 2023 Daily Chess.com Tourney. 1 day per move, play 11 others twice in your group, and only the top player moves to the next round. Oh well... made it to round 2 anyway! Highly recommend chess.com. They have had issues this year on handling the swell of new players as their database had became overwhelmed quite a few times. It seems they've added the firepower now to handle most of it.
|
|
|
|
|
I picked it up about 3 years ago after decades away from the game. I rarely play a game on there (when I do it's against a bot), but I do my free puzzles each day and it's improved my game immensely (I also watch some YT creators). I'm certainly not a 2250 player, but my puzzle rating is that high; it's easier when you know the critical point of the game.
By the way, people totally didn't understand the cheating scandal last year. Average people, even some top-level chess players, assumed one had to have a method to get the best move at every turn: either some secret access to an engine or an associate with an engine and a way to signal the move.
Cheating could be as easy as the associate sending a signal (visual, coughing, or buzzing his pants) that tells the player he is currently facing a puzzle situation: that there is a move or series of moves that wins the game (winning a piece can win the game at those high levels).
|
|
|
|
|
The current AI (search) looks so good, because it was so bad in the past. The links I dug up over a period of weeks on a particular topic are now (simply) filtered better. Impressive if you never knew how to search properly in the first place.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
wait till ALL the computers we use on an everyday basis interface with our bio metrics in real time, face, etc. and can "read" our moods, etc. and make recommendations for us based on that, and other things. - like being sick, cold, flu, etc. medical emergency, AI calls 911 for you without your confirmation, i.e. you go unconscious or are unresponsive...dead? the list goes on.
>> enter stage left, any sci-fi movie ever.
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: AI calls 911 for you without your confirmation, i.e. you go unconscious or are unresponsive...dead?
Already there: Mercedes added it to the E Class in 2016 as "Active Emergency Stop Assist" - if the driver stops steering and doesn't respond the car stops itself as safely as it can, hazards on, unlocks the car, and calls the emergency number.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
My cycle computer has long been able to notify my wife by SMS if I unexpectedly hit the tarmac, self-inflicted or otherwise. Hardly something new (although by definition it has no need to bring the bike to a halt).
Good to see that cars are finally catching up!
|
|
|
|
|
Griff firmly presses the horn and the car says, "just take a deep breath, count to ten..."
|
|
|
|
|
However it doesn't work like the previous post suggests. The previous posts suggests that something will be monitoring the driver directly.
However the Mercedes is monitoring what the driver does. Specifically is the driver using (touching) the steering wheel and if the pedals are being used. Based on those inputs then it responds in a certain way.
|
|
|
|
|
Shhh. Be quiet now. Everything will be ok. Just go to sleep. 
Time is the differentiation of eternity devised by man to measure the passage of human events.
- Manly P. Hall
Mark
Just another cog in the wheel
|
|
|
|
|
I Google most of the time, and Bing occasionally if I am Microsoft focused. But in both cases I usually get a useful answer within the first few returned links. Maybe I don't go looking for certain questionable sites  .
|
|
|
|
|
No. Topics like "Kriegsspiel" usually led to some news group. Now you actually get content.
As in "The US and Ukraine Krieggspiel ..."
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
Searched DDG for Kriegsspiel, first result was Wikipedia, second was kriegsspiel.org. Hmmm. 
Usually, when I’m searching, I have a general idea of what I’m searching for. Skipping over a few flotsam results isn’t particularly annoying to me.
Cheers,
Time is the differentiation of eternity devised by man to measure the passage of human events.
- Manly P. Hall
Mark
Just another cog in the wheel
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, DDG is my go to search engine. I search for an article (had the title) and the result link was on the first page. Tried the same search on google and it was on page 14!
|
|
|
|
|
I’ve never really compared the two. That’s frikkin amazing.
I only use Google when I haven’t found what I was looking for on DDG. But I’ll usually put a !w or !r into DDG before looking any where else.
I try not to use Bing. Ever.
Time is the differentiation of eternity devised by man to measure the passage of human events.
- Manly P. Hall
Mark
Just another cog in the wheel
|
|
|
|
|
Have never heard of "DDG". Was relating my "current" search experience to my previous experience using Bing in particular. Same queries. i.e. relevance of returned content. From a skeptics point of view.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry. Abbreviating ‘Duck Duck Go’.
Time is the differentiation of eternity devised by man to measure the passage of human events.
- Manly P. Hall
Mark
Just another cog in the wheel
|
|
|
|
|
I find overall that Google still (just) tends to return the most comprehensive range of results but that is less so than it was. It can often take scrolling through at least one page full of only marginally related adverts (sorry, 'sponsored results') to find the nuggets.
It does increasingly depend on how you ask the question too.
These days, even if you insist that the results must contain certain words in order to narrow down to a specific result, Google in particular will return many results that do not contain that word, possibly by using similar meanings or spellings?
Search used to be very 'serendipity' driven (can't think of a suitable word here), whereby you might often discover something different about a subject because the hits were somewhat random. Nowadays the engines are so focussed on pushing results based on what it is the engine thinks you are looking for (rather than what you are actually looking for) that you often end up with pages of irrelevant answers that don't contain known results you previously found.
This is the same 'feature' that causes you to see endless adverts for washing machines for weeks after you have bought one on-line - how many does the AI think one person needs! Woe betide you search for something for a friend that you have no interest in - for example I often buy historical ebooks for my wife through my account - guess what fills my feeds for days afterwards!
It's hard to express this clearly, but I think in an attempt to return more closely focussed results, search has gradually become less useful because the engine tries to eliminate things that it thinks are not relevant to the query you have made, and yet - for the more obscure subjects - those results are often the ones that lead you to an answer.
|
|
|
|
|
It frustrates me that when I add quotes to search terms that it treats that merely as a suggestion. I still get variations on the term and lots of sponsored results.
This weekend I found my ASUS router's wi-fi signal was weak. I was searching for additional ways to troubleshoot or if there were others that experienced the problem with the latest ROM update. Coincidentally the automatic firmware upgrader had recently updated to the latest.
Google kept showing me sites that would sell me a new router. Not much in the specifics regarding issues after a firmware xxxx upgrade.
I determined in the end after factor resting and still having the problem with a minimal configuration that it was probably a hardware failure. SO I bought a new router, same model. It worked right out of the box.
So now I'm left to wonder did Google know I needed to buy a new router or is it a coincidence?
|
|
|
|
|
Rich Shealer wrote: Google kept showing me sites that would sell me a new router.
Based on your description I just tried the following in google.
"asus" "wi-fi" weak signal fixes
I didn't see any ads for routers. At least not in the titles of the results. About half of the results were from the asus site. Only some were specific to the weak signal (as per just what was shown in google itself).
|
|
|
|
|
I think these things would be so much more useful if they had a narrow/broad switch. The narrow search would endeavour to return precisely the results that strictly matched what you were deduced to want, the broad search would widen to return the former plus less strictly associated results. Something to engage your interests, if you get my drift.
When I use our local library I find many, many books covering a wide range of subject matter, from which I often select something that just catches my eye. Other times I ask for books of a specific genre, or by a specific author, or even a specific book. Search engines would be so much better if they indulged both types of search (in my opinion).
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. That would be good - I was trying to say that the serendipty often encountered in search in the past has been removed. you can never tell when that will actually lead you to a better result!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
