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
Lol it means he has the same problem with it that I did: there’s absolutely no random element to blame so when you lose you just fucking lose and that’s all there is to it. The other person’s brain just stepped on your brain and wiped it off on the curb.
Yeah I played a bit as a teenager and after getting demolished several times by old fucks 5 times my age I just couldn’t take it anymore. Felt like there was nothing you could do to surprise them. Like running against a wall.
Generally random factors allow players with less skill to win. I think about that with games a lot.
It’s one of the (many) reasons I don’t really like DND very much. Huge random factor. You can make excellent tactical decisions and lose. You can be an absolute baffoon and triumph.
Some randomness is okay but not like that.
You must not like life lol.
I wouldn’t really characterize many things in life as the same kind of random. Throwing a dart at a dart board isn’t a random action in the same way as rolling dice
Furthermore, dnd’s randomization produces flat probability, which is often jarring.