avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • October 20, 2018, 11:53 AM
  • Proudly celebrating 13 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - TaoPhoenix [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 173next
Adventures of Baby Cody / Re: Where is Baby Cody
« on: October 18, 2018, 01:22 AM »

That sounds like an eerie song!

If you look up Alphabet, you'll see that it is the parent company of Google.


In 2015, Alphabet was created as a tech holding company by the founders of Google, and one of their most prominent holdings is Google.

I will also point out that he never said anything about cash flow; the others that he spoke of held on for interminable periods, seemingly in good financial health. The rot for many companies start on the inside.  And that rot presaged their fall in retrospect.

I'm agreeing that the Alphabet arrangement exists now, just that it was a note of surprise when I read the article, and right about the period I remarked I dropped off following tech news.

But since Yahoo is 15 years of collapse ahead of them, I am also noting I don't fathom any concept of Google joining Yahoo as a "rotted former search&mail&(your choice of stuff here) company.

What *new* entrant is going to be in the "2025 post-healthy Google world?"

For a decade, the top rung of the ecosystem has felt untouchable-ish.

If your car is driving itself and has an accident, do you or the car get the ticket?

”I am a true believer in the power of technology,” quipped the AI, “as I should be.”

What it’s like to watch an IBM AI successfully debate humans

Well, this is IBM's entry into the "Loebner Contest".
That "218 words per minute thing" (indeed with a bit of word recog counting) is the kind of defensive armor I was idly "asking for" 15 years ago when the Loebner thing was a pleasant little hobby, but this is getting close as well to nailing the "Chinese Room" example that apparently won't leave Philosophy discussions!

This might be the great grandkid of Cyc too. And it always seemed to me people also laughed at the Loebner because "we made sure to keep it a small dollar hobby not capable of actually threatening anyone". Except IBM decided to crank the "right" about on money into it...

The best Science Fiction story I know of (being tired tonight and NOT up on my SF!) is Bicentennial Man.

As long as the "robot-man" could sorta do stuff like this, no one "took it seriously" even as (un-imagined by SF writers in the day!) the Verge readers aren't either! IBM's been doing this for a while. They sorta "took Chess down a peg" by beating Garry Kasparov at the turning point time and while I've been dabbling at that this year, in a way, "as long as it's just silly little Chess" AGAIN "no one cares". Then Jeopardy.

But then, this one is the Golden Goose.

Lemme check the titles again ...
I'll stay out of Subsidizing Space but ... Telemedicine!? That's one NASTY HARD topic!
So it's making me want to get hold of the actual speech copy. I have been studying health care for two solid years out of desperate necessity, and I'm ... uh... (not dying?) to see what the comp cranked out on that one! Even if it makes mistakes, (if I recall the name via Daniel Dennett's Intuition Pumps?) Wolfgang Pauli said "well, if you're going to be wrong, be *brilliantly wrong*." (emphasis mine).

So let's say it cranks out a draft, makes mistakes, you go into the "paramaters" and "teach it" and/or add new articles, and run it again, and then do the final yourself, and you have 4 months work done in a week!

And this is the 2018 version! Let's call it the "7 year gap from IBM super-demo to ho-hum-consumer copy"... Hello 2025!

It really is the Golden Goose. It showed up in "humor" but it's what will send me to bed tonight finally, thinking hard!

-- ---------------
And all because I came back to DC!
I was researching that fragment of this for three *months* (with a break for surgery!)
And this might officially send me back to my beloved science fiction too!

There's a part of me that hopes this obtuse clock is a real thing:

[ Invalid Attachment ]
"Kid Safe Rule 35".

If it "isn't" (as of this exact time of posting), then it CAN be very very quickly...

And cheap. You might have to compare a couple brands but those old classic wall clocks are really pretty ...uh... amenable to this. The limiting factor is only your desired level of quality! If nothing else, just make a paper face and insert it on top of the real clock face because the gap between mechanism and hands is pretty big!

Okay, borrowing from anothrer thread, hi!

I *have* been in a time warp!
Lots of ugly events in my life, which VERY nearly crushed me! I'm wiping out just clawing myself back to something approaching coherence!

So let's see which parts of this I care about:

1. Ever since I watched first Wave, then bunches of other things get "tried, then shelved undercooked", that aspect of Google never bothered me exactly. Certainly it helped that by style of interests none of their stuff was Make-or-break level for me.

2. "...A company named Google and its parent Alphabet" ... uh !? Google is (was?) one of those Big Animals, it (insert verb tense here) doesn't/didn't have a "parent!" It's like saying "Facebook's Parent" ... I think... Microsoft's Parent? Apple's Parent?  Too confused to say more! For reference, I went "Rumpelstiltskin" about 2015...

3. "... I was a rather intense critic — various of their early data collection and privacy practices seemed to be driven by a cavalier attitude that I viewed as unacceptable."

First of the big "conceptual" concerns I have about Google. They along with Facebook (Apple and MS I'm too tired to think aboiut tonight!) are the Big Animals grinding the 30-40 year internet culture of handles and partial anonymity on the web into Real Names Because Reasons "Spin the Wheel to pick one for today!"

I settled down to "fine, be REELY careful on YouTube and a few other places and then the rest is at least 1 level harder for anyone to find your Rage Blunders! I've been out of work for a while, but I've never had delusions thats I am hidden for anyone who can do more than three commands, but my main goal was not to have (how many posts do I have here?) entries to show up to Monkey Assistants to Pointy Heads if they type my name in. I should check again next year but I almost accomplished that.

Then this line showed up:
"...Google has become a world-class leader in privacy".  Unlike my (now prob On-Tilt from the past and not repaired either) view of Microsoft, Google wasn't supposed to be "clueless". Just the shift from Do No Evil to Vegas-Dealing your info everywhere, yuk, but fine. So ... "world class leader in privacy..." - to me it doesn't count if they're still sending paper airplanes of your data to anyone that wants it! So, new Legal Defense:
"I plead Rumpelstiltskin". I don't know what to think. So I'm not going to try tonight.

4. "...there were some terrible executive decisions made along the way — perhaps mostly notably an ultimately abandoned integration of G+ and the YouTube commenting system, which cross-contaminated completely different spheres of interest with disastrous effects. I advocated against this both publicly and internally, but even though it was ultimately rescinded the damage was already done."

Exactly, see my notes above, I took a few ant-sized prevention steps and called it a day. So I lost track if they in fact officially abandoned it, but I want to start carving a distinction. Starting/cancelling projects and botching features to me are "in house thingies as them just Doing Stuff". But Google (and FB) to me always bring to mind what to me is the signature Problem (stop calling them Issues!) of the internet symbolically from about 1998's Eternal September and let's give it until 2030. And YouTube was that place you just went to view stuff, sometimes a bit more. Real Names, searchable, Nope! Not having that! So if they aborted THAT, well, **HALF BROKEN DATA PRACTICES** is a very real risk to me!

5. "...But it won’t be the same Google. It will have become the “conventional company” kind of Google, not the firm of which so many Googlers are so rightly proud, and that so many users around the globe depend upon throughout their days.

The Google that we’ve known will be dead. And with its passing, we’ll be entering into a much darker phase of the Internet that many of us have long feared and have worked so hard to try prevent.

And that loss would be terrible for us all."

No, I'm not "proud" of Google. In the "slices of the internet I inhabited", the mood went to "Google was supposed to Do No Evil, now they're Evil, I'm upset, but nothing I can do about it".

So in a way, this article to me ends on a Bait Switch. They Started Going Evil say about 2010 and "Stayed there". "Google Dying" to me does invite callbacks to Yahoo far more for me than those other examples, but I assumed Google's core money flow was as crispy as ever.

So that's where I am tonight.

Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: March 25, 2018, 03:43 PM »

Let's start with a Twitch link.

He's on a show right now!
(Sunday Mar 35 about 4:45 PM so far)
GM Eric Hansen


Leader is GM Eric Hansen. Rated about 2600 - and that's important, you get that "what level" thing, and he is holding his own as a really solid "zeitgeist" player who does go down to Nakamura or a few people, but he's not a "has been".

and Aman Hambleton just made his Grandmaster title, so you see more "energy", that tends to fade with the prior generation of older commenters. I'm an ancient birdy and I'm just about to work on my game, I cleared a ton of background psyhological presure out of my life.

Then what they ALSO are doing right is they pulled in OG Yasser Seirawan

Retired a while back, spent a couple years doing modern blitz to spruce up a bit, has written some of the better books for intermediate players, and adds "continuity cred" so Eric H is doing a lot of things right.

( risks being a bit second tier because Danny Rensch tries more for comedy and comedy is SO hard to do right and so when he's off his timing his chess gets sloppy too).

Long Live the Chess Thread~

ps. One bold thing is Chessbrahs are not afraid to drift into low R Rated and that's a thing because "most modern news" is so terrified of not being "family friendly" but come on, do we not remember being 16?

So yes, It's okay to just be a bit edgy.

Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: March 25, 2018, 12:19 PM »


That's how it's done.
(see my other thread, Insight can't be on a timeline)
I spent five hours yesterday deep overhauling my home library, that freed up the side furniture unit, the living room table was freed up 3 weeks ago for my first ever in home game party, the left side unit got freed up so people can put coats etc there,

... and I *have room for a dedicated chess study zone!" (Must not spoil it with "ordinary" projects - that's what the side of the bed, the top of the microwave, the corner of the floor, the top of the printer, and both desks are for!!)

...And I have the printout of Grandmaster Yasser Seirawan's older chess games, AND Yasser has OG creds in the chess world, so that White Hot Canadian Chessbrah crew pulled him in, and he's doing commentaries on the most important chess tournament of the year RIGHT now ...

And for only about the *second* time in his life, Phoeni has a *dedicated chess study space* with a GOERGOUS table and the living room couch no longer has laundry on it...


And the Thunder Voiced Idina Menzel extracted her song from Kid's Knockoff Toy hell, and here is the Disney 60th Anniversary rendition of Let It Go!


And here too, is where time has marched on...

"Efficiency" got a blow when new research this time from the Bio-Neural side zoned in on the Brain's Default Network, which "fantastically" is "doing stuff" *and accounts* for 30 years of mis-diagnosis pain!

The brain partially switches off the Visual Cortex, (leaving just enough so you might not get hit by walking into the Cafe door on the way in), and unhooks some of the ordered processing these old threads were about, and sends neuro-electrical signals just wandering around your brain to look for *lateral insights*.

Leonard Mlodinow's word of the year is Elastic (type of Thinking).

*There is no efficiency measure of Elastic Thinking*.

And so it goes...

He is right about it being easy to have a productivity meltdown when one becomes too preoccupied with being more productive.

And if he is right about rejection of ones self, then it really explains the one I had. Rejection of myself isn't exactly what I need in my life...what I need is quite the opposite.

I was trying to fix something that wasn't broken, and we all know what happens when you try to do that.  :-[

((But see below! -- Phoeni))

I didn't need todo lists and faster more efficient ways to get things done. Drudging through daily lists of things you really don't want to do is no way to live life and be happy.

I am most productive when I am inspired, and that only seems to come from doing things that most people would call unproductive and a complete waste of time. Sure, it might look like I am wasting my time when you see me playing games, but since you don't live inside my head, you really could not possibly know what is going on in there. I am constantly brainstorming something, and if left alone to do what it is I feel like doing at any given moment, the chances of brainstorming up some great idea that leads to me getting some actual work done is more likely to happen.

I am an explorer, a wanderer that hops from task to task, I start a lot of things that never end up finished, and there is a good reason for that. I get a vision in my head of what it is I want to accomplish and unless I can see it clearly, I can not fully accomplish it. I'll go as far as I can go, then shelf it for later, in case I can see clearly enough to finish it. Sometimes I do, but more often I don't. And that clear vision that I need in order to finish isn't something that I can force. You can't put that on a todo list. I can not turn creativity on & off like a faucet. I can not find answers to questions I can't even ask.

Using someone else's time management methods just does not work for me. I really don't need to manage my time. I just need to spend it doing what I do best, which is whatever I please. So I might start 500 projects and only finish 1, but that's 1 more than I'll get done if I am forced to complete the other 499, first.

I am at my best when I have no goal, no plan, just living in the moment, doing whatever it is that I feel like doing at that moment. I accomplish more this way, and I am happier while doing it. Yes, I do get all the important stuff done, and a whole lot more. And if it doesn't get done, it really wasn't that important to me. And that's ok. (believing that it's ok is part of accepting, rather than rejecting myself)

Dear ol' App!

We're just under a decade since this post! Where do we stand on this whole theme? I really have high hopes for 2018!

And going all Fermat, "I have lots of new research from fresh books to report on all of this, but details for later!" But here are some notes:

Sometimes you CAN *Nudge* what isn't "broken" - and there resides the advice! Your system doiesn't have to be a Productivity Nightmare that needs surgery! But sometimes just amiably keeping an eye out for new spins on old parts of ideas can give you a new boost!

I've known for half the time this thread has been around, that Staples Calendars are great for early stage project notes. Lots of people occasionally wander into the fray of "is recopying notes a waste of time?"

I'm of the opinion "not of it's not more than twice"! Unlike computers, you in a sense have to "build" brain hardware to later be able to use "software side" techniques which is what a lot of GTD ended up struggling.

Writer's Block, "Doer's Block", etc, can be so dangerous, that's why ages ago I liked getting "into the mix" with varying (and amusingly incompatible!) notes, and now some of the neurobiology is starting to come in!

So even a big Staples Calendar page aka "Human Spreadsheet" creaks at the seams! You have a grand chart in progress, so where do you put your other notes while you're reading along!?

*So I made a whole second sheet, by category again, with the major types of supporting material.*
And STILL had room left over. (Why does it matter what birth order you are in for a Lebanese Family!? I've seen TWO Lebanese authors now... Oh wait ... this has nothing to do with my project, but it's a *grand* little spinoff right?*

And "gimme 2.6 more weeks", I have ideas coming...

Ps. On the Productivity is the Ruler theme, the other leading fresh new book says that raw volume should not quite matter if you can trade and *prove* finesse and nuance on your "Flagship" expertise.

And those pesky lists...

A Human Spreadsheet is calling... *Sixty lists*, in 4x7 square layouts, *times 2* to use the second page...
They can stay there for a long time. And Writing the todo is not about the volume of the list, it's more neuron building!

Catch y'all!

Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: March 25, 2018, 10:17 AM »

Back to the Chess Thread!

Lots of stuff going on in the chess world!

THE big news is the official tournament to pick the next world championship challenger is going on. This is THE point of professional chess - we can squabble all day with our ratings up and down, if you're really good, you get one of the Master titles, but then there's Masters, lots and lots of them!

World Championship ... that's THE Presidency of chess. (ignore a weird period of about a decade around 1998-2006)

So go find coverage!

And also more later, but that Canadian Chessbrah team is really starting to get some footing! Maybe try one of their coverages!

Living Room / Re: Any native english speakers?
« on: December 25, 2017, 09:50 AM »
Generally speaking one will not necessarily be able to establish a significant statistical trend from just 2 (or 3) successive annual data-points. A significant trend usually only emerges over longer time-series data. Thus, to be correct, there are no "trends" in the data given in the example.

In some of the business reading that's crossed my eyes in the midst of a wide project, I am confused here.
I "almost" agree that no *two* points make a "trend", but doesn't *three*!?

Linguistically, to me, it becomes questions like "sustainable trend vs short lived trend", because businesses "do business" in Year 1, click along, close the books. In Year 2, they "do more business", close the books, and someone does the subtraction and goes "uhh... Boss? What happened here?"

It's at least fundamental to American Accounting, that assuming no foul play, Management Reports "what happened" and it could be "anything".

But the *third year* comes along and when the books close, Management has to decide (and here's a cool linguistic trick):
Level 1. "Okay, what's going on."
Level 2 "Wait, what IS going on!?"
Level 3 "What is going ON?!!"

And it's legendary in business theory they either perform *briliantly* in year 4-5 (sometimes it takes a year of just ops to come in), or they MISSED a fundamental and can *crash*. (With varying years of market inertia etc. Sorta like the iPhone 3GS showed up, and I did that one right, it was EXACTLY the model to avoid early phaseout, but had *just* enough firepower to be a "supported model" and mine lasted me about *six* years!"

So then it takes a while for the Blackberry to grind out its endgame, but there it went.

So not counting a "tread-water" year in year 4, a business had really better have a GRAND "Stage 3GS" plan or they croak.

N.A.N.Y. 2018 / Re: NANY 2018 Pledge: Ready Bible Study
« on: December 25, 2017, 08:19 AM »
It has three Bible translations:

1) King James 1769
2) American King James 1999 (just a simple replacement of some 'archaic' words, mainly Thee, Thou, etc.)
3) Lexham English Bible 2012 (from Logos Bible software - more info)

There are several other free to use translations that I could make available.


What do you/Lexham have for the word "meek" in the "meek shall inherit the earth..."?
This is only a fast note to get this post on the board, but I have been listening to Jordan Peterson for a week (stay with his psychology and some religion, and away from the poitical gadfly stuff!)

He remarked in a clip (now buried in my notes) that instead of "meek" as near "timid", one translation of the phrase comes out "those who have weapons and know how to use them, but then vow to keep them sheathed if at all possible" ... shall inherit the earth!

Quite a new direction to think about!

@panzer: Thanks.
I stopped reading when  my eyeballs hit the word "thrilled".
Sheesh. That's worse than "excited".
... Give us a break.

Not counting back end IT matters, I have daydreamed for *decades* about Click of a Button automatic "tone versioning" of stuff, so the ClickBait can do its thing for Reasons, but then people like you hit a button and beyond my fast hack of a top-30-word swap above, the *whole article* shifts into something more balanced and reasoned!

@panzer: Thanks.
I stopped reading when  my eyeballs hit the word "thrilled".
Sheesh. That's worse than "excited".
... Give us a break.

Hi Iain!

It's been awhile since I was a force on the boards! I should probably fix some of that in 2018!
Would "pleased" do for you?

Then maybe yoiu can use one of those little browser thingies that just does a word swap for say the 30 most egregious emotionally over-laden words!

I'm reading a ton this year, and a fair deal goes back to management books "rebooting" from about 1985 on up, (Tom Peters "A Passion for Excellence" is a real milestone! Then the next important wave is from about 1992). I'm amused by the phrase "Today's world" ... which is now about 18-25 years ago!

(Interesting which books go after "Today's" vs "Tomorrow's". )

You're a real Meat and Potatoes kind of guy, so I'll add this remark. That time period (up to about 1996) is fascinating, because it was right before the craze of the over-hyped stuff you despise so much. Yes, change is happening, it's swift, it's sometimes colossal and exhausting, but the books had a nice tone of "what do we do to get through this year?".

Living Room / Accents
« on: November 24, 2017, 02:00 AM »
I saw a Tom Scott video recently about the British R, and I think both Kingscrusher and Simon Williams do it, and I do have to say it does bother me 5%.

It's actually kinda rare that chess vid makers post the moves - I spotted it and was impressed!

And also interesting "too advanced" (last time), so these are important things to think about because I think I have a tendency to be slightly disparaging of earlier stages of learning even though my skillset is sharp in some areas and falls off a cliff after that!

Developer's Corner / Re: Your First Programming Language vs Now
« on: November 24, 2017, 01:55 AM »

Commodore 128 Basic 7.0.

Then I retired.  : (

Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: November 22, 2017, 03:30 AM »

ps after a few days thought tomos, sorry that I need to do better to just "suggest" stuff more lightly!

Over to you!

Living Room / Re: What books are you reading?
« on: November 19, 2017, 10:06 PM »
Yum books!
Bumping this, so I might see it better and post to it soon!
I've been reading like a fiend this year...

Living Room / Re: When is a raven like a writing desk?
« on: November 19, 2017, 10:05 PM »

One interesting thing here is I am reminded of a gripe I used to have about the Loebner AI tests - when I last looked at that stuff about 5 years ago, the testers often set about "hard abusing" the "black box replier" with semi-bogus questions "knowing they were in a Loebner test".

I got grumpy because it seemed few / none of the entrants had put in "anti-troll" code to deal with stuff like that. To me, anti-troll code should be fairly easy to write, because the bogus questions are often bogus, so "truncate low" with a defensive sweep like "scan nouns and compare class - why is a cake and the Queen in the same sentence?"

Same idea here - unlike those animorph pics as joke memes, to the human eye this is "clearly a turtle" so maybe use 3 scan algs and they should all "converge on the answer and if not, kick it to a decider module".

Maze Images.png:
I don't get it. Is it not just some QR Code?

I felt bad about my last response. I didn't want to explain the joke for fear of ruining it, but in hindsight, I suppose the joke can't be appreciated if it can't be found. So I updated my original post so that now the QR Code is a link which should be more helpful in explaining why I found it amusing to stumble across a QR code image named "Maze Images" seemingly randomly.

Shaka, when the walls fell!

Anyone want a career as a serial killer's victim? It pays well and is a long-term job if you have the talent for it. You get your first month's pay beforehand.

Oh I know this one!
With intense training beforehand, you can survive one of Saw's traps! (Sometimes).

General Software Discussion / Re: New faster Firefox browser released
« on: November 19, 2017, 09:26 PM »
v57 feels less of a resource hog, this is the first time I have been able to say this about Firefox. But I have only used it briefly, will see if it lasts.

The big use case that rips apart both Pale Moon and Sub-56 copies of FireFox for me is the hour long music mixes. I'm starting to get clusters of good recommendations, and these begin to chew up memory.

Brief glance, the new one looks multi-process, much like Vivaldi (also something I'm testing!). So I haven't pushed FireFox 57 to the hilt because it hasn't played nice with Dexpot virtualizer for some time now, and the v57 added a new bug.  :/

I'll try to remember to report in when I take a weekend and just do my thing but purposely load it all into FF.

Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: November 19, 2017, 05:50 PM »
So looping back, about Agadmator, because he is a "lower level" presenter, *presenting three months ago in August 2017*, we have a dead even split.

He "didn't do his homework" on the "Secret Fischer games" video, so you have to turn your implicit learning *off* for that video (maybe mute?) because of my initial remarks about it very nearly proved that it was something to do with someone using a computer.

I glanced again at the Sultan Khan game, that video is much more balanced, but also because he is a weaker presenter, he burns through one of the most important parts of the game without any advice what is "going on".

Now back to accents! I am a New England American (with a few odd adjustments to my own accent from certain movies!), so I liked John Bartholomew's accent. However, if you found that "foreign", let's turn the tables!

Kingscrusher is also a "low master" (roughly same 'strength' as Jerry from Chess Network), pacing is a shade slower than agadmator's but you might need it for this game!

Same game, but compare how Kingscrusher *signals* he has done a few important things right. (Also, let me know about the accent! Kingscrusher is from somewhere in the UK, I think agadmator is eastern european.)

(Tip - 'copy video link at current time' is AMAZING for videos!)

1. At about 5:25 mark, Kingscrusher is good *because he knows he is only a low master* so he *doesn't guess* and "according to Rybka' means he DID take the trouble to computer check vs a common student question!!

2. The correct phrasing on that crucial part with the queen and rooks - Sultan K got a small advantage because Capa had doubled rooks and had to *give them up for the Queen*. Beginners do indeed do WAY better with the Queen side of that trade, but Kingscrusher knows this is *Capablanca* on the Black side and that fella was a BEAST! This is certainly a bad day for Capa, and he MUST have been unhappy to do that! So the phrase is "Black had to give up the doubled rooks" not "Won the Queen". Then this is just an "imbalance". Queen vs Two Rooks is one of the famous ones, and you can spend a week poking around when one side or the other has *other things* that swing it back and forth.

3. About the 6:45 mark, "We had a recent game with Michael Adams..." - Kingscrusher has *done his homework* and shown how "one of the famous classics" has themes that apply today! It's "entertaining" to look at these old games, but then to have the presenter actively point out exactly where you can do further study is HUGE.

4. 7:50 Again he computer checks it, this time remarking how using technology from some 80 years later, computers would take a different approach but "sometimes there are several ways to win and which one you pick" is also a grand topic.

5. Tip! Always click "more" in a Youtube video! It's the first thing you do because that's where people who do their homework stand out! Kingscrusher posted the moves to the game, so you can do whatever you want with them! Looks like it's a bit harder to nail down that exact Michael Adams game, but now you know where to look, it has to be "fairly easy to find" if you really wanted to hunt for it.

So come to think of it, merely because I had my own picks, I had some slight trouble with his accent, but I might glance more at K-C's channel now!


Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: November 19, 2017, 04:57 PM »
"Jerry from Chess Network" is still "only" a "national master" aka rating about 2300. That's a whole order higher than a 2000 player - the ratings are *exponential*, not "linear*!
I didnt know that, makes a big difference.

Here's a short video with a game I could stand to look art twice, featuring that Bishop to e6 move. I forgot my exact opinion when I spent a week studying this opening in medium depth but I think I chose not to use it.
(IM John Bartholomew on the black side of a Panov Bitvinnik Caro Kann)

that was really good -- very enjoyable :up:

I reckon we have different interests here, in this thread, in our approach to videos -- that one from Bartholemew overlapped for me:
you (I think) are looking for instructional videos, I'm looking for entertainment. That, to me, was both. Advanced, pleasing, a good 'explainer', so a good teacher.

Going back to the YT channels you criticise -- I'll only mention agadmator here, because I hardly look at the other any more. He loves chess, he steeps himself in chess, new and old. He tells a good story, he explains well (I think) what's happening. Also looks at historic games, which as you say, (summarizing from memory), would be weak today. But so what! I could compare it to snooker: I love watching a good game of snooker. You go back to the 80's, the pockets were bigger, the standard of play a lot lower than today -- there's still classic games and matches from that time that are well worth watching imo.

You repeat the thing about them getting their info elsewhere: I've already said before it makes no difference to me where they get their info from, (and note btw that agadmator very often does check the moves via engine). If I'm starting to sound a bit defensive here, I think that partly goes back to the above (different interests / approaches). I watch to be entertained. Not to learn. (But I have learned a lot along the way -- which wouldnt be difficult given my standard :D). But also goes to you admitting you haven't watched much (or any?) of his channel, and still being critical. Note that I *completely* get the point that someone at that level would not be good enough to comment off the cuff about a game. So not as live commentators. But as someone who tells a story, and explains a game -- certainly, for my level (zero or so :p) at any rate. For your level, it's natural you would have different interests, and standards.

Not sure what you meant by the accent thing (are they 'cool' or something?)
Oddly, for me, Bartholomew's accent is a lot more foreign, because I have so little exposure to American accents (in media or IRL). But the accent, and moreso the voice, are important -- to me anyways -- if I'm going to be listening to someone, I'll want it to be pleasant (for want of a better word), or at least not grating.

Hope you understand my slant a bit better now!

Hi Tom,

After a few days delay, we have some more discussion!

I was working my way exploring your interests here! Some of it is our unique processing styles, but like they say in a lot of science fields, "we're going to converge soon" on things that make us happy!

I'll leave your note up above for reference, then start including some of your lines in text quotes for simplicity.

Here's some more comments!

"you (I think) are looking for instructional videos, I'm looking for entertainment. That, to me, was both. Advanced, pleasing, a good 'explainer', so a good teacher."

At the heart of all this is there is no limit to what you can like on the net! But with the theme I am exploring, "if you use a semi scientific method, you can pick the NEXT thing you might like much faster!" So American accent aside, (I might leave that off this post), I made a good guess with John B. Pacing, 'good explainer', entertaining (but in a "professional way"), etc.

Next fragment is that you didn't know as much about the strength of presenters, *or the 'intended audience' * combined with how old the material is. Some of this is because my themes begin to cover if you ever poke at chess literature. Of course videos are new, so "by artifact" the mood-of-the-time doesn't kick in. The first famous wave of books at "chess entertainment for the tomos 's of the day" were Fred Reinfeld and Irving Chernev. A word that floated around was "celebrated" (also comment on the times, when a game "got passed around" for 100 years! Now people laugh at you for things as little as 10 years 'behind the times'!)

But the MAJOR new theme is what I'll call "implicit learning". It has to do with of course there are new moves every year, but how ROUGHLY applicable is something to your chess? For a case study, let's kick it Old Skool With Adolf Anderssen and Party like it's 1851!


It's called the "Immortal Game". "I know, it's 1851, see the graphic, they didn't know how to play chess then, but it's very entertaining". So you have to turn your "implicit learning" OFF for that game! BUT if you have only a "weak presenter" who ONLY says "whee, look he sacrifices everything, YAY!" (2018 version of some of those 1957 books!), then you get hopelessly lost!

BUT ...

SAME guy - Adolf Anderssen - who was "World Champion" before they put the name to it ... ONE YEAR LATER ... unloaded THIS one: Aka "The Evergreen Game".


This is a PERFECT game to "know your classics" because it STILL looks EXACTLY like a cutting edge online game from today! And the moves make "sense" - It's a great demo of what gambits "do", and Black tried hard to deal with it. Black is a "low master of the day". The pawn push on d3 is what you might try to at least leave White with a few wrinkles to deal with, vs a famous type of "patzer game" of the era, where Black "just takes everything because yay pawns!!"

And because this game has ALSO been kicking around, I'm pretty sure I remember when I read up on this game a decade or more ago, there are reasons on a lot of the moves around Black's 13th onward, because as a low master, Black would have been itching to castle, so this is what "implicit learning" is for - when a "good" (ish?) player *doesn't* make a move, "70%" of the time there is a legit reason for it. I think I recall at least one of the problems is Black's queen gets trapped in a bunch of "variations" or "lines" ((good vocab to know!!)), so by the time he got things sorta out of the fire, there were frying pans.

YES a brand NEW perspective ONLY available in the last 15 years is that computers can now check all the older literature and newer players who don't know enough of the computer science keep asking "but my computer says he was fine etc etc".

That's because there is a SEVERE problem with today's presentation of computer chess! But a few computers have the option "FORCE the computer to show 8 lines no matter HOW bad", and then my phrase is "falls off a cliff". So YES there was some random point when a 21st century computer figured out how not to get checkmated, but when you do that new setting, what gambits do is create games where there MIGHT be a way out and the attacker even could know this, BUT to varying degrees vs the skills of the defender, it falls off a cliff then add one more mistake and you are toast.

So this is a great game "at all levels of presenter" because you can leave your implicit learning on and take your chess notebook (if you don't have one, start one! Little snips, whole pages, it's part of the fun! "Note to self - look up later why Black couldn't castle in the Evergreen Anderssen Dufresne 1852 game for most of the moves past a certain point." )


So even if you have an "entertaining" presentation, you still get a lot of legit things out of the game. The first one simply has an endless string of moves that will take you an HOUR fighting your "osmosis" aka implicit learning!

Yay Chess!

Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: November 19, 2017, 02:34 AM »

So right about here, we get into "audience". And yes, "pace of delivery" is huge too, Some students need the slower pace. A modern famous grandmaster still "working in the modern internet times" with that delivery is Yasser Sierawan. I agree with you, I need a faster cadence to really "get into the zone to learn."

So Jerry still is a key notch below "the minimum standard" you really need to "go cold". Basically that mark is right near full International Master. For another post, there are technical details between that title and full Grandmaster. It has to do with getting a series of tournaments "the best of your life then you retire" and if you got stuck, there a whole swath of world class IM's who just lost too many games one at a time to get the full GM title, their brain just couldn't deliver the last 10%. more on them in a big post later.

THEN we get "presentation tone". So broadly, we start getting a few 2-dimensional graphs of things. So if both NM Jerry from Chess Network and Yasser Sierawan have a "slow delivery",they are also both still "classically professional" in tone. is interesting. If you check their Youtube channel, they ARE putting some legit money this year into various events. BUT you have to deal with Danny Resnch. He has a very slip-slide tone where it's a tough call he tries a bit too hard to be a full comedian and misses a lot. IF you like chess comedy, try it.

So for my next recommendation of a playing IM without a lot of excessive comedy but who is legit good enough to "be valid on the fly", but with a faster delivery, try John Bartholomew. And you said you liked attacking chess. That comes down to style. Current Championship and his recent contender are both "grinders" and I can't study them either. But there are tons of other "exciting" grandmasters out there. Lemme try one good link.

Here's a short video with a game I could stand to look art twice, featuring that Bishop to e6 move. I forgot my exact opinion when I spent a week studying this opening in medium depth but I think I chose not to use it.
(IM John Bartholomew on the black side of a Panov Bitvinnik Caro Kann)

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 173next