source

Transcript:
Elon: The actual number of moves that are not utterly stupid in chess is tiny and chess will be fully solved one day

Chess.com: Skill issue

Elon: Chess is hard for humans, but not for computers. One day, it will be fully solved like checkers. Between now and then, or even after, have fun. People enjoy may games/sports where machines are vastly better.

Chess.com: There are more possible chess games, by about 40 order of magnitude, than atoms in the observable universe. To solve chess, you’d have to map them all. Good luck.

Elon: Wrong, all legal chess positions are ~40 ooms less than the estimated atoms in the Universe. And ASI will figure out ways to solve and compress that are far beyond what we could possibly comprehend. (Here I am arguing with some random intern at a chess website)

Chess.com: I’m a full-time employee

Elon: (something-emoji)

Chess.com: Even my friends don’t text me back that fast

  • testfactorEnglish
    166·
    16 days ago

    Solved or not, computers already smoke even the best chess players in the world. It feels like both of them think people can still compete with computers at chess? What a weird argument.

    • terranoid@lemmy.cafeEnglish
      24·
      16 days ago

      It’s more that Elon Musk is arguing that “chess is too stupid for me and it will eventually be fully solved” and the other dude is arguing that it’s basically unsolvable given its complexity, and it’s not as simple as he claims.

      The history on this is that Elon Musk thinks he’s a super genius and needs to maintain that narcissistic mindset and one really dumb fucking thing that’s come out of that was he claimed he’s above chess because it’s too “simple” and prefers real genius strategy games like RTS.

      Now I love RTS but he’s just a narcisstic prick trying to feed his ego and his argument doesn’t go beyond that. He’s not good at chess, probably has a shit ELO, so to convince the world he’s still a super genius he has to provide a good reason why he’s not also a chess grandmaster.

      Saying it’s too “simple” and that RTS is more of a showcase kinda solves that conundrum. It allows him to bake in this illusion of being a genius that’s too good for chess, but also probably not great at RTS but in my experience they’re mostly training.

      This is narcissist behavior. They fucking love looking like geniuses, especially him. He wants to be seen as this generation’s Tesla, a little boy genius who just opened a rocket science book one day and made the next gen rocket.

      Narcissists need to pump up that illusion and anything that proves it might be wrong is sort of emotionally dangerous. In his worldview, geniuses are good at chess, so why isn’t he a natural at it? Well, it’s below him, and it will be fully solved by the AI that the boy genius creates. As dumb as that fucking argument is, it’s all about his ego and maintaining the illusion.

      • CubitOom@infosec.pubEnglish
        6·
        16 days ago

        Not even normal RTS, but like a casual mobile RTS. I played polytopia back in the day, it was fun. But I wouldn’t compare it to chess, or even a desktop RTS game.

      • Zwrt@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
        2·
        16 days ago

        Some irony here is that a not uncommon way to develop an rts or board game is to start with chess and mutate it into something new.

    • blockheadjt@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      9·
      16 days ago

      No, the employee was simply saying the game will not be “solved.” That’s very different from what you said.

      Computers can look at a current board state and assess the pros and cons of all available moves considering the next x number of turns, where x is a number much lower than the possible number of turns in a game.

      For chess to be solved a computer would need to be able to see the outcome of each move for as many turns as are possible in a game.