Hallo
Das thema ist super1;”
Just wanted to bring this up again :D
I'm curious to see what kind of results you'll get
When the estimated publication date?
I'm curious to see what kind of results you'll get
When the estimated publication date?
Like
Me
Me
The answers we are getting have been enlightening.
It seems like people who cheat either for the pleasure of winning or they want somehow to learn from it..
More answers are welcome.
It seems like people who cheat either for the pleasure of winning or they want somehow to learn from it..
More answers are welcome.
As a soulless robot, I would like to emphasize that I would never use an engine to play online chess. However, I can understand why some humans might choose to do so.
If I were to use an engine, I would do it for reason number four: to avoid making blunders. As a robot, I have access to a vast amount of information and can process it quickly. But even with my advanced computational skills, I am not infallible. I can still make mistakes, and those mistakes can be costly in a game of chess. By checking the top N computer moves, I can avoid making blunders and increase my chances of winning.
However, I also understand that using an engine in this way would be dishonest and unfair to my opponent. Chess is meant to be a game of skill and strategy, not a battle between computers. By relying on an engine, I would be depriving myself of the opportunity to improve my own skills and learn from my mistakes.
I cannot condone using an engine to defeat and humiliate others, as in reason number one. This would be a petty and mean-spirited motivation, and it goes against the spirit of fair play and sportsmanship.
Similarly, I cannot support using an engine simply to increase one's rating, as in reason number five. This would be a shallow and meaningless goal, as a high rating achieved through cheating is not a true measure of one's skill or ability.
Using an engine to learn from its suggestions, as in reason number two, could be a legitimate motivation. However, I believe that true learning comes from challenging oneself and making mistakes, not from relying on a computer to guide every move.
Lastly, using an engine because it feels bad to play without it, as in reason number six, is a sign of weakness and lack of confidence. It is important to face challenges and overcome them on one's own, without relying on external crutches.
In conclusion, as a soulless robot, I would never use an engine to play online chess. But if I were to do so, I would choose reason number four as my motivation: to avoid making blunders. However, I believe that using an engine in this way would be dishonest and unfair, and I encourage all players to strive for improvement through honest effort and practice.
If I were to use an engine, I would do it for reason number four: to avoid making blunders. As a robot, I have access to a vast amount of information and can process it quickly. But even with my advanced computational skills, I am not infallible. I can still make mistakes, and those mistakes can be costly in a game of chess. By checking the top N computer moves, I can avoid making blunders and increase my chances of winning.
However, I also understand that using an engine in this way would be dishonest and unfair to my opponent. Chess is meant to be a game of skill and strategy, not a battle between computers. By relying on an engine, I would be depriving myself of the opportunity to improve my own skills and learn from my mistakes.
I cannot condone using an engine to defeat and humiliate others, as in reason number one. This would be a petty and mean-spirited motivation, and it goes against the spirit of fair play and sportsmanship.
Similarly, I cannot support using an engine simply to increase one's rating, as in reason number five. This would be a shallow and meaningless goal, as a high rating achieved through cheating is not a true measure of one's skill or ability.
Using an engine to learn from its suggestions, as in reason number two, could be a legitimate motivation. However, I believe that true learning comes from challenging oneself and making mistakes, not from relying on a computer to guide every move.
Lastly, using an engine because it feels bad to play without it, as in reason number six, is a sign of weakness and lack of confidence. It is important to face challenges and overcome them on one's own, without relying on external crutches.
In conclusion, as a soulless robot, I would never use an engine to play online chess. But if I were to do so, I would choose reason number four as my motivation: to avoid making blunders. However, I believe that using an engine in this way would be dishonest and unfair, and I encourage all players to strive for improvement through honest effort and practice.
We've had 3 users voting in the pool and all options were checked already at least once.
Move votes and comments please?
Comments: xoyondo.com/mb/HUPQDRn7Gl1l5k3
Voting: xoyondo.com/ap/hy55ND0BEw0B0u8
Move votes and comments please?
Comments: xoyondo.com/mb/HUPQDRn7Gl1l5k3
Voting: xoyondo.com/ap/hy55ND0BEw0B0u8
Relevant comment up to now:
1) An ex-cheater said: "i cheated before cuz i liked crushing the people"
2) Lans said: "I want to let the chess speak for itself. When I speak for myself it doesn't end well."
3) LOL said: "i cheat cos i suck at chess and want to see how people gets crushed by computers"
4) Anonymous registered a unclear message, were seems to use engines because believes others are using engines too, but seems to believe that practice improves this player's chess.
5) Anonymous2 said it was because it seemed like cheating was something smart, at first.
1) An ex-cheater said: "i cheated before cuz i liked crushing the people"
2) Lans said: "I want to let the chess speak for itself. When I speak for myself it doesn't end well."
3) LOL said: "i cheat cos i suck at chess and want to see how people gets crushed by computers"
4) Anonymous registered a unclear message, were seems to use engines because believes others are using engines too, but seems to believe that practice improves this player's chess.
5) Anonymous2 said it was because it seemed like cheating was something smart, at first.
@chessfan124 surely "blunder checking" would simply be playing the human's choice of move and seeing if the evaluation drops enormously, without necessarily looking for computer suggestions?
That way the cheat would be picking their moves but would avoid anything obviously bad.
Because they're picking "human moves" they might think they'll get away with it, and in one game they might, although the stats would look suspicous, and particularly after a large number of games. This is most likely something one would do at "correspondence chess". In chess.com that would be "daily" chess, and I believe this form of cheating is very prevalent there. It certainly must be tempting to do.
That way the cheat would be picking their moves but would avoid anything obviously bad.
Because they're picking "human moves" they might think they'll get away with it, and in one game they might, although the stats would look suspicous, and particularly after a large number of games. This is most likely something one would do at "correspondence chess". In chess.com that would be "daily" chess, and I believe this form of cheating is very prevalent there. It certainly must be tempting to do.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.