I love the suspenseful delay everytime there’s a check. Either it really shows someone thinking it over, or they’re trying another move and it’s not working.
Thanks for the heads up! My thoughts: thank god. In time for the candidates too. When Chessbomb and then chess24 got wiped out, I stopped following tournaments as closely cuz the chesscom page is cumbersome to use and laggy af.
I can wholeheartedly vouch for lichess.org. Not only because of their privacy policy but for what they offer in terms of chess. Besides the standard game you get an analysis engine that points out good moves, how likely a player is to win, let’s you switch sides, etc.
But my favorite thing is actually the different chess variants you can play. There’s one where you are facing a legion of pawns, another where captured pieces explode and take down adjacent pieces and another where you get to replace captured pieces on the board. But my go to is simply chess with randomized but symmetrical positions in the backline (pawns stay the same). This makes every game unique and challenging; you actually need to think about your best moves from turn 1 instead of memorizing openings which is perhaps my biggest gripe with default chess.
It’s important to note that blocking ads is NOT theft. Don’t fall for this creepy idea, which is the criminalisation of the inalienable right to privacy.
I would like to respectfully disagree here. Don’t get me wrong here, I’ve been using stuff like uBlock Origin for years. And I do not make money on my website, nor do I upload to YouTube and so on. (So I have no horse in the race)
If “the deal” is you get to visit the website and do whatever they offer, and THEY sell your data and penetrate your eyeballs with shit you don’t need, that is the deal. Admittedly, I’m no lawyer so I don’t know if it’s “theft” if you don’t hold up your end of the deal here.
Now, companies like Facebook and so on can fuck right off, and I will continue to block everything as long as I can, but don’t kid yourself if you for example like a YouTube Channel and block everything there, they will make less money, which can in theory impact their livelihood.
Can anyone recommend a blocker that is as good as uBlock Origin and can white-list only certain channels on YouTube? Especially some niche guys i’d like to support without subscribing outright to their Patreon
I have a cousin who works deeply in advertising and marketing infrastructure. He’s a code guru who helped to build advertising engines for Facebook and now works deeply in the industry. He has told me to my face that my efforts to delete ads from my life is stealing from him. Coincidentally he uses Linux and a suite of privacy and security products to hide his identity. Rules for thee but not for me.
The other TL;DR is that Timur Gareyev has been accused by two women of sexual misconduct as well – also largely without proper consequences and transparency by US Chess.
I applaud lichess for shining a light on this important issue. Chess should be a welcoming game for everyone. There should be no place for sexist assholes.
Not sure I understand everything, although I think I understand that an influx of new players can totally skew statistics.
It’s worth noting that this is about ELO ratings, so lichess may have a similar problem (I think it might be the case for Blitz on Lichess to suffer from a similar problem), but some of the proposed fixes are FIDE ELO specific (increasing starting ELO).
The problem seems to be that the ELO ratings aren’t accurate to estimate the correct probabilities for a match between a long-time chess player with higher ELO rating and a player from the “Queen’s gambit wave”.
Now the authors seem to paint this as a problem with the new players being underrated, the ELO distribution to be skewed. I agree that this can be a skew, I wonder however if the solution should be to boost ELO ratings of lower-ranked players.
Overall the best fix would IMHO be to bring together higher-ELO with lower-ELO players in matches in order to allow the ELO distribution to move ELO points down from the upper end, so that the ELO numbers again match the winning-probabilities between two players. I guess there is hesitance to do that because it means the old-guys might lose rating points and people are naturally protective in this regard.
bumping ELO points would lead to an inflation in ELO rating overall, it does not fix the root cause.
lichess.org
Hot