proof

[mosfel24]

First of all, am I anonymous? Maybe I just don't like to paste myself all over the internet so I can show off my physics degree and call everybody else "kiddies".

you didn't read all my comments about the origin of UWS, while it -erroneously- contains the word 'solution' at
then end, it was simply posed as an idea by an IT man (project manager) and nothing more. Thereafter
Allis Phd stated that it means 'determining' (not proving) the theoretical outcome of a game
The wikipedia is out of context (third time now i write this) and not the holy math bible (which
doesn't exist (*) )

Great nitpicking words by you. Yeah, "determining is not proving." Maybe someone decided to clarify the definition since (Allis 1994). Yeah, you pasted multiple Wikipedia links to support your argument, and when I nicely paste the contents of the actual article you turn right around and say that Wikipedia has errors, that it is out of context. Yeah, I pasted the whole description under the title "Ultra-weak solution". If you want to argue with me, please paste the context within the Wikipedia article you are talking about. I strongly recommend that you should become a lawyer instead and practice fleecing other people using verbal circumlocution with the added bonus of high amounts of pay.

[jefk]

mosfel 24 wrote

too brain-fogged to read the paragraph

another insult again, well I'm getting used to that.

No not all (sharks) here think the same, like you claim In fact they don't imo seem to think
at all (just like to attack; like eg. a P3 engine, but life isn't like chess). Like i said, starting
with an unjustified attack is often an unwise thing to do; you'll be warned
so you're not a physicist claiming to have solved chess ? well good for you.
then why posting all this drivel.

Referring you to the kindergarten again but if you want to continue there
as anonomyous poster (there's only one Feldman, in Japan, being Ceo
but his chess rating is not known. Just like i enjoy to beat chess kiddies psycho
or not within 15 moves and then seeing them going back crying to their
mommie i would enjoy also playing a real game of chess with you and
observing your incompetence (except for trying to making insults, an
art which really doesn't require much intellectual capabilities).

btw so in advance of possible further kindergarten discussions,
there's wasn't not only a Bronson movie 2/3, there also is 4/5:

[mosfel24]

mosfel 24 wrote

too brain-fogged to read the paragraph

another insult again, well I'm getting used to that.

No not all (sharks) here think the same, like you claim In fact they don't imo seem to think
at all (just like to attack; like eg. a P3 engine, but life isn't like chess). Like i said, starting
with an unjustified attack is often an unwise thing to do; you'll be warned
so you're not a physicist claiming to have solved chess ? well good for you.
then why posting all this drivel.

Referring you to the kindergarten again but if you want to continue there
as anonomyous poster (there's only one Feldman, in Japan, being Ceo
but his chess rating is not known. Just like i enjoy to beat chess kiddies psycho
or not within 15 moves and then seeing them going back crying to their
mommie i would enjoy also playing a real game of chess with you and
observing your incompetence (except for trying to making insults, an
art which really doesn't require much intellectual capabilities).

btw so in advance of possible further kindergarten discussions,
there's wasn't not only a Bronson movie 2/3, there also is 4/5:

Yeah, well you're a correspondence "player" who probably just uses Stockfish. Like I said earlier, somebody who plays with Fritz and SF and makes opening books. Such intelligence needed to play the moves that Stockfish chooses. Also, I can make an opening book in my sleep with one hand tied around my back. And you're talking to me about drivel? Well, this is chess programming, not practicing your hand-eye coordination by moving pieces. I challenge you to create a stronger chess engine than the one I have made. And no, no cloning Stockfish

[jefk]

mosfel24 wrote

create a stronger chess engine than the one I have made

so you worked on a chess engine ? Well then you should go to the programmers
forum there are thousands of kiddies who made chess programs (including this
young mr Luca in Romania). So tell us the github of the chess engine you made.

When i started my post about the sorts of proofs required to show that chess is a draw with
perfect play regarding to opening theory i suggested that chess programmers, obnoxious American Phd
students and math purists or chess (psycho or otherwise) kiddies better should not react to my comment(S).
So you clearly haven't read that comment or have disdain for that; just as some others but they
now are mostly in the kindergarten (where there seems to be a more civilized discourse, partly
maybe because some insults (by your buddie shawn) were removed
(this shawn is (almost?) an Mba not a Phd, and jamie whiting (with a cambridge B A degree in math)
qualified as math purist you as engine programmer are programmer, not a mathematician.
You three were not qualified -and advised- to react, but nevertheless chose to (try to)
insult me. So going to (try to) continue to insult me now (eg in the area of correspondence
chess, a field in which you clearly have no experience_ ? well good luck. FYI not for you,
but maybe some others in this verbal abuse arena, as a person i tend to be rather unpredictable
(as young mr Luca may already have noticed) both in chess and in real life sometimes i count
to ten, sometimes three, or sometimes i strike back immediately. In your situation you can
try the third chance (and hoping i'm not going to count seven more times to ten instead of
hitting back straight away; have fun anyway but it's far beyond a civilized discourse ofcourse, a trait
which i already observed when you came with your sarcastic comment about four in a row).

PS actually i worked on a chess engine in the past but not going to tell you more about this.
because you lack a basic respect for my person (and maybe also for other persons,
don't know such persons exist, American psycho's or otherwise just an example
PS2 (for moderators, or a few reasonable people) it's -besides lack of understanding and
prejudice probably just because of envy how some IT kiddies are reacting to my
theoretical post about chess being a draw. Having failedin their (math or other) studies
such kiddies, psycho or not, often resort to the easy profession of IT programming
making relatively lots of bucks with that and then later developing an insane disdain (out of
envy) for other people especially those with higher degrees; awell known phenomenon
in society and really the least of my worries. It's usually because they cannot play chess
themselves, or procreate (for mental or physical reason) they start to p[rogram an 'engine'
as some sort of legacy, and then competing -or not- in the virtual world with other 'engines'.
The Discord channel for engine programmers must be full of such silly kiddies and while
some have cooperated for the chess engine SF (with unlike P3 usually 0.000 evals)
most seem to continue a futile dream that once in their lifetime on their own
they be able to beat SF and thus having made the best chess 'engine' in the world.
Too bad for them chess is a draw and thus there never will be a 'best' chess engine
because all the engines of all these IT kiddies will never be able to win with White
nor with Black. Meanwhile -after their failures at Ba level or before that, they never studied anymore
any serious, chess, math physics nor science (nor philosophy) , and i probably can beat most of such
obnoxious blindfolded in a slow game of real chess. Despite (or because of) my age.
btw Both moderator hgm also a physicist and myself in the past have experience with
dealing with a young and agressive chess/IT boy, never finished his studies some 30 yrs ago, who
thought he was a genius and only insulted other people, he was removed from the Dutch computer
chess society, and maybe also banned here (dunno); hint a certain VvD (for the old timers);
yes i remember the comment by HGM even althoug this was thirtyfive years ago "sometimes
in otb chess people can be antisocial but computer chess can be fun". Mentioned guy (not hgm
but vvd also never became a chess IM btw, which apparently was his dream when he was young.
So that's the way you Felman (and maybe young mr Luca) now want to go ? Well good luck then
but behave yourself (and you can't later complain to your mommie you were not warned).

[jefk]

felman wrote

recommend that you should become a lawyer instead

well i don't care what you recommend to me, felman.
As you may have found out, or not, i also have an Mba (just like young mr Shawn a new self described
'global leader' (from Wharton just like the great Donald T) apparently, and as part of that also did a
course in international law btw. (no not at Wharton, an accredited American Mba nevertheless(.
But in computer chess you usually don't come far with law; nor with insults and derogatory language
But that's something for you to still discover, apparently; with or without your 'engine'.

So, again (for others) what's your 'engine' (on github or otherwise) ?
any idiot can program a chess engine nowadays, their are zillions of educational resources
and in the end it's mostly about debugging (and a waste of time) And what's your chess
rating as a human (otb or online without cheating) ? just for info for some others.
(i'm not pretending to be a GM, but also not in a paranoid way hiding my rating
like nowadays many people do, as chess with Twitch and so on has become quite popular
with Nakamura etc. but then such millions of people discover its' not so easy.

Maybe you would like to become a CCM like me without using any 'engines's
well good luck.But no i don't use SF so much in correspondence chess.

In addition, (mostly) for others ICCF correspondence is almost dead, but i made a suggestion
to let the results of thematic tourns contribute to the rating . The ICCF doesn't have a
discussion forum otherwise i would have posted it there instead of this nowadays apparently
unfortunately despite the moderators mostly computer kiddie chess forum neverthelss i don't think easily
about insults, and mosfel you now are also going to be added to my 'foe' list here (because of the brainfog
comment but also because of some ridiculous suggestions about my correspondence chess (title and
experience) . Congratulations. happy now (or honored, like this mr shawn ? ) Well i don't care,
really . (gave you a chance to go to the kindergarten but in second thought it's not
really worth my time in continuing discussion at such a -low- level.

[Rebel]

Time to lock this thread for a cool down period of 3 days.