Magnus Carlsen Auctions Jeans, Admits He Can't Beat Chess Engines (apnews.com)
- Reference: 0176576581
- News link: https://games.slashdot.org/story/25/03/01/051200/magnus-carlsen-auctions-jeans-admits-he-cant-beat-chess-engines
- Source link: https://apnews.com/article/magnus-carlsen-chess-jeans-dress-code-auction-5d97263f06cccabd4a961198039e77ea
But Carlsen drew more attention [4]on The Joe Rogan Experience last week — partly by saying "I have no chance against my phone." (Although he'd also described beating a fan's computer program, [5]according to Firstpost , by playing "some kind of anti-computer chess, where I just closed up the position as much as possible and gave it as few possibilities as possible to out-calculate me.")
> Carlsen admitted that he rarely plays against chess engines due to their overwhelming strength, but acknowledged their value as training tools. "I rarely play against engines at all because they just make me feel so stupid and useless. So, I think of them more as a tool than anything else."
And this led Carlsen to add "If I started cheating, you would never know," [6]reports Indian Express :
> It's not just a throwaway line about cheating either. On a two-hour-long podcast, where he touches on mostly everything under the sun, Carlsen fixates on cheating in chess. He also details how a player of his calibre would need very little to cheat in chess. "I would just get a move here and there (from an aide). Or maybe if I am playing in a tournament I just find a system where I get somebody to signal to me when there's a critical moment: a certain moment where a certain move is much better than the others. That's really all I would need to go from being the best to being practically unbeatable. There's so little you need in chess (to cheat). It really is a scary situation," Carlsen said before pointing out how in 2010 the captain of the French chess team was helping a teammate decide his next move at the Olympiad just by standing in specific spots around the table...
>
> "If you're not cheating in a dumb way, there rarely is going to be a smoking gun. And without that smoking gun it is going to be really hard to catch people," Carlsen admits on the podcast... "As long as there are monetary incentives for people to cheat, there will be cheating in chess," says Carlsen on the podcast.
The article adds that Carlsen does not believe Hans Niemann used anal beads to cheat — and that he thinks Niemann has become a much better chess player since the incident. But...
> "Top level chess has been based on trust a lot. I don't trust Niemann. Other top players still don't trust him and he doesn't trust me," says Carlsen. "There is still something off about him now. We played an over-the-board tournament in Paris last year where there was increased security and he didn't play at nearly the same level there."
[1] https://apnews.com/article/world-chess-jeans-dress-code-7040b103edb8813a7d145319845fce0a
[2] https://apnews.com/article/magnus-carlsen-chess-jeans-dress-code-auction-5d97263f06cccabd4a961198039e77ea
[3] https://www.ebay.com/itm/256824319843
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybuJ_nIXwGE
[5] https://www.firstpost.com/sports/chess/magnus-carlsen-on-playing-against-chess-computer-engine-difficulty-joe-rogan-podcast-13867015.html
[6] https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/chess/why-old-magnus-carlsen-vs-hans-niemann-cheating-scandal-in-news-9855786/
Any secret pockets? (Score:2)
What was in those pants he was so desperate to not leave them unattended at the venue?
Jeans (Score:1)
Don't get it.
If you want to donate $14K to charity, why do you need to involve some used pair of jeans? Jus my donate the money to your charity of choice and forget about the used jeans.
Re: (Score:2)
> Don't get it.
> If you want to donate $14K to charity, why do you need to involve some used pair of jeans? Jus my donate the money to your charity of choice and forget about the used jeans.
First rule of financial narcissism; charities are fucking awesome..when you’re donating not-my money.
Re: (Score:2)
Awfully negative spin on a purely positive outcome.
How recently was this news? (Score:2)
My layman's understanding was that the history of direct human vs. computer chess veered away from competition and toward training purposes or engines obeying uci_elo limitations quite a while ago; with the last human victories of any real interest being some draws in the early 2000s.
Has this just survived as a perfunctory interviewer question; or did humans vs. bots actually stay interesting longer than that?
Re: (Score:2)
Similarly I find it interesting the word "AI" wasn't in the summary. Chess was the paragon of AI for decades. If only we had super-human chess AI, we'd have super-human reasoning. Now chess isn't even called AI. Really the case for today's chess algorithms is a lot stronger than it was for Deep Blue, which was mainly human-specified heuristics and brute force.
Admits? (Score:2)
The top players have been unable to beat ANY engine, including American and European chess engines, since the 90s.
Re: (Score:2)
I too admit, I cannot beat any chess engine.
I think that question makes the interviewer look like a stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
> I too admit, I cannot beat any chess engine.
I have yet to meet the engine that can't be beat.
All it takes is a few sticks of dynamite.
To prevent cheating (Score:2)
Put the players in a sealed room wrapped in a Faraday cage. Only one door in or out and only cameras watching.
If you really wanted to be paranoid about cheating, they only get to wear a pre-approved g-string (plus tops for women).
Re: (Score:2)
Put the players in a room together?
But what if their opponent is the one feeding them moves?
Chess cheating is hard to detect (Score:3)
> There's so little you need in chess (to cheat). It really is a scary situation," Carlsen said before pointing out how in 2010 the captain of the French chess team was helping a teammate decide his next move at the Olympiad just by standing in specific spots around the table...
> "If you're not cheating in a dumb way, there rarely is going to be a smoking gun. And without that smoking gun it is going to be really hard to catch people," Carlsen admits on the podcast... "As long as there are monetary incentives for people to cheat, there will be cheating in chess," says Carlsen on the podcast.
Communication for smart cheating in chess is sort of like encryption with a combination of steganography and one-time pads. It would take a lot of statistical analysis combined with a huge amount of luck to detect even that communication was going on, let alone decrypting the message. The only way to prevent such cheating is to isolate the two players in a Faraday cage with no sight or hearing of anything outside of the room, like a Fischer-Spassky Game 3 but even more isolated.
Re: (Score:2)
> Chess cheating is hard to detect
Not according to Carlson,
> I don't trust Niemann. There is still something off about him now.
He's insinuating he's cheating.
> "If you're not cheating in a dumb way, there rarely is going to be a smoking gun. And without that smoking gun it is going to be really hard to catch people"
Except for him, he(Carlson) only knows NIemann is cheating. He's such a shitty, deplorable sack of shit that sucks at chess and always blames everyone else but himself for his shitty play.
Nothing comes between Magnus (Score:2)
And his Calvin Klein jeans.
Stupid (Score:2)
Why does chess need a dress code? I'm sure that's a formula for attracting new talent.
Re: (Score:2)
The females should have to play naked, so you can ensure they're not cheating and to make it easier to spot "anal beads".
Re: (Score:2)
Most sports have a dress code, and there is literally nothing wrong with that.
Re: (Score:2)
> Most sports have a dress code, and there is literally nothing wrong with that.
This. People who host an event make the rules for participating. Don't like those rules? Then don't participate.
Go ahead and try to change their minds, but remember whose dojo it is.
Re: (Score:2)
Try to play in the NBA wearing the other team's jersey.