An actual interesting computer chess read about FF2

[Dann Corbit]

It is just a plug - very normal in the course of business. Advertising statements do not have to be 100% truthful, that is a fact of life , and it is called puffing. Just has to be close to truth. If you are getting to get a plug on a chess engine, Stephen is about the best person on the planet to plug a chess engine. So smart move by Albert. Stephen is right about the 0.0 evaluations, they are annoying. Also I saw another Chessbase page where Albert just about thanked everybody he could , including the LC0 and Stockfish teams, so he is clearly trying to making amends, which is better than what some authors do. No one is perfect, especially me....

You avoid the lies he spoke during the interviews of FF1 and FF2
At this point, his "thanks" are as hollow as an empty can of Budweiser...

Calling someone a liar is very strong language. I find it extremely distasteful.
What, exactly, were his lies?
Quotes, please.
If you cannot produce exact quotes demonstrating your claim, then what is your claim exactly?

There is a big difference between someone who thinks that they have done a great thing whereas others disagree and someone who knows he has not done a great thing and says that he has.

I think, for instance, that calling someone a liar when they are not is easily as deplorable as being a liar.

Go back and watch those interviews.
Easier still, visit the blog set up by SF.
Even easier, log into Discord and find out for yourself.
It's your business to believe what you want to.
But you don't take the work of hundreds of people and turn it into your discovery.
Unlike you, I'm not talking of a few upset people...

People have complained of interviews of Albert and Steve on the Chessbase site.
Obviously one sided (and quite possibly they are).
I am very glad you have provided a site with an obviously neutral position so I can know that there are no adverse judgements going on.

[glennsamuel32]

https://lichess.org/blog/YCvy7xMAACIA80 ... -a-rip-off

https://lczero.org/blog/2018/08/update- ... s-team-on/

Conclusion
It is sad to see claims of innovation where there has been none, and claims of improvement in an engine that is weaker than its open-source origins. It is also sad to see people appropriating the open-source work and effort of others and claiming it as their own.

Everyone is permitted and encouraged to modify and improve code from Stockfish/Leela while giving credit; that is the intent of open-source software. Everyone is allowed to copy Stockfish/Leela and sell them, provided the terms of the Stockfish/Leela license are met. But don’t pretend that the product being sold is something it isn’t.

[Sopel]

It is just a plug - very normal in the course of business. Advertising statements do not have to be 100% truthful, that is a fact of life , and it is called puffing. Just has to be close to truth. If you are getting to get a plug on a chess engine, Stephen is about the best person on the planet to plug a chess engine. So smart move by Albert. Stephen is right about the 0.0 evaluations, they are annoying. Also I saw another Chessbase page where Albert just about thanked everybody he could , including the LC0 and Stockfish teams, so he is clearly trying to making amends, which is better than what some authors do. No one is perfect, especially me....

You avoid the lies he spoke during the interviews of FF1 and FF2
At this point, his "thanks" are as hollow as an empty can of Budweiser...

Calling someone a liar is very strong language. I find it extremely distasteful.
What, exactly, were his lies?
Quotes, please.
If you cannot produce exact quotes demonstrating your claim, then what is your claim exactly?

There is a big difference between someone who thinks that they have done a great thing whereas others disagree and someone who knows he has not done a great thing and says that he has.

I think, for instance, that calling someone a liar when they are not is easily as deplorable as being a liar.

21:40 - 23:20 "[... leela ...] the neural network is so large and the way it was designed was so convoluted that they required a fast graphics card simply to read the neural network on every single positions", "some guys in the japanese neural network world designed a neural network that could be read so fast, thanks to some specific changes, that it could run specifically in the cpu and not sacrifice the huge speed differences that we needed with the leela style or alpha zero style nets" (I guess that's technically not a lie since it's not even wrong)

26:25 - 26:35 - "I'm an expert at the leela style nets"

31:18 - 32:00 "fat fritz 2 then came to existence, it's began to be truly developed [...] and yea I can say that it's generally stronger than what's out there right now, without a question, and clearly so. Obviously it'll beat stockfish 12 which is the official version. But even the unofficial version [...], even there it's ahead, measurably so"

57:15 - 58:35 Silver: "I think it's hands down best in end games. I'm serious." "I have seen consistently better [endgame] results from fat fritz 2 over all of it's colleagues whether it be leela nets or even the stockfish's running around" "Enough so that it stands out"

1:00:25 - 1:00:35 - "Fat fritz 1 and fat fritz 2 were projects of love and passion"

and to answer your question that will follow it: no, these are not provably lies, but it's on the border

[flok]

It is just a plug - very normal in the course of business. Advertising statements do not have to be 100% truthful, that is a fact of life , and it is called puffing. Just has to be close to truth. If you are getting to get a plug on a chess engine, Stephen is about the best person on the planet to plug a chess engine. So smart move by Albert. Stephen is right about the 0.0 evaluations, they are annoying. Also I saw another Chessbase page where Albert just about thanked everybody he could , including the LC0 and Stockfish teams, so he is clearly trying to making amends, which is better than what some authors do. No one is perfect, especially me....

You avoid the lies he spoke during the interviews of FF1 and FF2
At this point, his "thanks" are as hollow as an empty can of Budweiser...

Calling someone a liar is very strong language. I find it extremely distasteful.
What, exactly, were his lies?
Quotes, please.
If you cannot produce exact quotes demonstrating your claim, then what is your claim exactly?

There is a big difference between someone who thinks that they have done a great thing whereas others disagree and someone who knows he has not done a great thing and says that he has.

I think, for instance, that calling someone a liar when they are not is easily as deplorable as being a liar.

Go back and watch those interviews.
Easier still, visit the blog set up by SF.
Even easier, log into Discord and find out for yourself.
It's your business to believe what you want to.
But you don't take the work of hundreds of people and turn it into your discovery.
Unlike you, I'm not talking of a few upset people...

So you are claiming someone, and then someone else needs to do all investigations himself to figure out what you mean?
Isn't that silly?

[glennsamuel32]

It is just a plug - very normal in the course of business. Advertising statements do not have to be 100% truthful, that is a fact of life , and it is called puffing. Just has to be close to truth. If you are getting to get a plug on a chess engine, Stephen is about the best person on the planet to plug a chess engine. So smart move by Albert. Stephen is right about the 0.0 evaluations, they are annoying. Also I saw another Chessbase page where Albert just about thanked everybody he could , including the LC0 and Stockfish teams, so he is clearly trying to making amends, which is better than what some authors do. No one is perfect, especially me....

You avoid the lies he spoke during the interviews of FF1 and FF2
At this point, his "thanks" are as hollow as an empty can of Budweiser...

Calling someone a liar is very strong language. I find it extremely distasteful.
What, exactly, were his lies?
Quotes, please.
If you cannot produce exact quotes demonstrating your claim, then what is your claim exactly?

There is a big difference between someone who thinks that they have done a great thing whereas others disagree and someone who knows he has not done a great thing and says that he has.

I think, for instance, that calling someone a liar when they are not is easily as deplorable as being a liar.

Go back and watch those interviews.
Easier still, visit the blog set up by SF.
Even easier, log into Discord and find out for yourself.
It's your business to believe what you want to.
But you don't take the work of hundreds of people and turn it into your discovery.
Unlike you, I'm not talking of a few upset people...

So you are claiming someone, and then someone else needs to do all investigations himself to figure out what you mean?
Isn't that silly?

I would call that due diligence.
And there's no doubt as to what I mean
All the information is there on those links.
It's silly if you don't want to take the effort to understand what's happening.

[towforce]

Calling someone a liar is very strong language. I find it extremely distasteful.

+1

Under most circumstances, it's best to avoid calling people liars as a matter of good taste.

Also a matter of productivity: in the future, it might be more difficult or time consuming to deal with people who heard you make the distasteful remark.

Obama, a two-term president of the USA, uses the word "mischaracterise". Whatever you think of his politics, you should copy this aspect of his behaviour.

[dkappe]

In today computer chess correspondence GM's are oveerated and so are their statements. There is no human that can beat SF13 with no opening book running at 16 core modern CPU at ICCF TC using whatever they have at their disposal. The very best they can do is to draw.

So let’s run the next TCEC in a lights out data center and get rid of the web GUI. It’s wasted on us humans anyway.

[noobpwnftw]

Is there a rule in propaganda that says one side must not upset the other?

When people do crap like that, they should be prepared for someone returning the favor.

I got enough popcorn ready just to see it escalate by the way.

[gonzochess75]

Calling someone a liar is very strong language. I find it extremely distasteful.

Do you find it distasteful when accurate?

[glennsamuel32]

Calling someone a liar is very strong language. I find it extremely distasteful.

+1

Under most circumstances, it's best to avoid calling people liars as a matter of good taste.

Also a matter of productivity: in the future, it might be more difficult or time consuming to deal with people who heard you make the distasteful remark.

Obama, a two-term president of the USA, uses the word "mischaracterise". Whatever you think of his politics, you should copy this aspect of his behaviour.

Definition of liar

: a person who tells lies or has a reputation as a liar

Should I have used something else like...

https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/liar

Why should I speak in the Queen's or "political" language, and sugar-coat my words ?
The word "liar" isn't abusive, it's just more blunt and to the point


Is the DailyMail or Piers Morgan being extremely distasteful with the President of the US ?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... l-out.html


These are a few posts with the same word.
Believe me, there are lots more
Sadly, everyones' "lingo-radar" wasn't functioning upto spec.


http://talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.p ... ed#p883969

http://talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.p ... ed#p879800

http://talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.p ... ed#p831526

http://talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.p ... ed#p748840