TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

How God Plays Chess (2018)

161 pointsby akkartik5 months ago

12 comments

tromp5 months ago
&gt; “No, no,” said God, “it was really tough. More than 10^35 legal positions<p>God should know there are approximately 4.8*10^44 legal positions [1].<p>&gt; Secondly Ken was predicting that the game of chess was a draw, i.e. that probably a majority of all legal positions, including the starting position, would lead to a draw with perfect play.<p>Only the latter is what the game being drawn means. The majority of legal positions is in fact overwhelmingly to one side&#x27;s advantage, as is clear from sampling a few dozen random legal positions.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;tromp&#x2F;ChessPositionRanking">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;tromp&#x2F;ChessPositionRanking</a>
评论 #42370505 未加载
评论 #42386480 未加载
评论 #42372346 未加载
palsecam5 months ago
So God plays backwards, so to say. He does what’s called <i>retrograde analysis</i>, “a technique employed to determine which moves were played leading up to a given position” (cf. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Retrograde_analysis" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Retrograde_analysis</a>)<p>I had a vague intuition of doing the same (going backwards) to generate the <i>winnable</i> Solitaire card deals, but I didn’t get far with it… Does anyone have experience&#x2F;ideas on that? FTR: a similar discussion on X, started recently by Jonathan Blow: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;x.com&#x2F;Jonathan_Blow&#x2F;status&#x2F;1865520149891346634" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;x.com&#x2F;Jonathan_Blow&#x2F;status&#x2F;1865520149891346634</a><p>I ended up generating totally random deals, then filtering-out those unsolvable by an algorithm of mine (described at <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;FreeSolitaire.win&#x2F;strategy#remarks" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;FreeSolitaire.win&#x2F;strategy#remarks</a>). It’s fast &amp; good enough to run on-the-fly, when a player starts a new game. But this isn’t an intellectually satisfying solution.<p>Note that “The probability of being able to win a game of Klondike with best-possible play is not known, and the inability of theoreticians to precisely calculate these odds has been referred to by mathematician Persi Diaconis as &quot;<i>one of the embarrassments of applied probability</i>&quot;” dixit <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Klondike_(solitaire)#Probability_of_winning" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Klondike_(solitaire)#Probabili...</a><p>We need another genius like Ken Thompson for Solitaire!
评论 #42386537 未加载
mock-possum5 months ago
The whole article being ultimately an ad for chess endgame position <i>DVDs</i> of all things was quite a twist.
评论 #42370325 未加载
Scarblac5 months ago
I didn&#x27;t know that anecdote. The point that a perfect chess engine would not necessarily be hard to play a draw against (until you accidentally play a losing move) is one that many people miss.<p>Although it could of course use some strong existing engine to pick a move in drawn tablebase positions. I assume Stockfish already does that.
评论 #42377794 未加载
janalsncm5 months ago
Chessbase is one of those pieces of software that would be completely eaten by a cheaper alternative if the market was bigger. $400+ for a single download, selling mostly open source data, and it looks like it was made in 1998.<p>The thing is, there is money in chess but not that much money. There will never be a unicorn in chess software.
评论 #42371375 未加载
评论 #42371266 未加载
veidelis5 months ago
Really appreciate the Leko story about the endgames. He&#x27;s the top level commentator that I enjoy the most, but I don&#x27;t always understand what he says in his analysis. Leno&#x27;s Banter Blitz was also quite fun to watch - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;m.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=5-eGwi2NSmY" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;m.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=5-eGwi2NSmY</a>
thom5 months ago
ChessBase is a horrible program and you don’t need it to get your own tablebases. You can generate your own with:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;syzygy1&#x2F;tb">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;syzygy1&#x2F;tb</a><p>But everything up to 6 pieces is on BitTorrent these days. The 7 piece tablebase is 20TB or so, so it’ll be a few years before you can fit that one your phone. Pretty sure Lichess has an API for that. Never tried to hook it up to Stockfish or Leela though.
评论 #42377756 未加载
snikeris5 months ago
I have trouble believing in God, but when I play chess, I sometimes get the sense that it’s not me and the opponent playing against each other, but God playing against himself. I guess it’s something to do with the mystery of insights.
评论 #42370243 未加载
评论 #42370450 未加载
soegaard5 months ago
Love the Leko anecdote.
pmdulaney5 months ago
Dice, no; chess, yes.
评论 #42371059 未加载
hatthew5 months ago
Maybe I&#x27;m missing the point, but this seems like a long-winded way to say &quot;most positions are a draw, and theoretically losing material doesn&#x27;t matter if you can still force a draw eventually&quot;
FergusArgyll5 months ago
e4, best by test