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
You must log in or # to comment.
“Even my friends don’t text me back that fast” is a wonderful insult.
Our lad just starched the richest man in the world in his own office.
straight up baking soda’d his ass
Laid down the diatomaceous earth around the perimeter.
When I read that line I audibly whispered
”god damn dude”
I verbally oofed
The guy who pays people to play video games for him so he can fail at pretending he played himself in a “Hello, fellow kids” moment is pretending to be smart again? Wild.
What is ASI? Adolescent Sexualised Imagery?
Ass shit iguana
Aging Smarmy Idiot, Elon is the model
Artificial Super Intelligence.
I’m a ssSUPER! Thanks for asssking!
If it’s made by Elon Musk’s company then these are the same picture.
Artificial sentient intelligence maybe
I feel like the whole point of this stunt (even if it backfired on him) was to introduce ASI as the next goal for investors.
Flipping the entire table after crapping on an the pieces is Elon’s idea of a solved game
The man with the Large Paedophilia Model can’t even solve himself.
He’s got a text file on his computer called Elon’s Chess Moves
So I guess Elon tried to get into chess because it’s a smart people hobby, got demolished, and now is having a sour grapes moment.
Very much a tommy talerico mentality but somehow musky got the luck
Probably also paid others to play for him like with his stupid video games, he’s fucking pathetic.
I would be curious what his highest chess.com raing is. I got to 1650 once, a middling score, more often in the 1500s but don’t play much now.
1650 a middling score?
cries in 800 elo
Are you on chess.com though or the other one, they have a different lower rating system I think, lichess.com I think the latter might even be non profit but I still used chess.com because I was already there when I learned that.
1650+ is about the top 40% of chess.com players (say 5%, not all humans).
Pluck a random off the street and your 800 will beat 19 out of 20.
It’s not middling, it’s an early-advanced rating. For perspective, an Elo differential of 400 implies 10:1 win:loss odds.
It’s okay bro, I’ve been practicing getting better at chess for like 10 years now and I’m still 1100. Chess is fucking hard.
I think some people don’t understand what a pastime is. I don’t care if someone solves chess just like I don’t care if someone uses AI to generate an image. I play chess to play it. I make art to make it. The doing is the point of it.
Shouldn’t that make you actively anti-AI-gen images, though, not just neutral about them?
I don’t know what he has against chess, but this is like the 3rd time I’ve seen him try to convince everyone that it’s pointless because of computers.
Can’t lose to chess if you refuse to play it
I’m pretty sure it’s because he can’t stand losing. The man clearly suffers from a narcissistic personality disorder.
If you read “careless people” you see that Zuckerberg is the same. His minions purposefully lose at Catan with him to make him happy.
Right? I’m sure he expected to immediately be a god at chess with no studying or practice, then got upset when that wasn’t the case.
Yes, because of his financial success, he considers himself a genius—which he very obviously never was. This is a common trait among billionaires. Many of them are psychopaths who have amassed their wealth through utter unscrupulousness, irresponsibility in the form of an absurd willingness to take risks, and sheer luck.
In the case of Musk, Thiel, and various others, that stroke of luck was PayPal. That company was so successful that it made all of its investors immeasurably rich—it was more a matter of chance that PayPal succeeded, and everything that followed really wasn’t all that difficult because that kind of money cannot lose anymore no matter how ridiculous stupid someone might be.
That’s precisely the problem: We only hear about the people who bet everything on one card and won—they’re portrayed as geniuses, which they never were. We never hear anything about all those who failed miserably—and that’s the vast majority.
Billionaires aren’t geniuses or even above-average in intelligence. Their financial success has, in the rarest of cases, anything to do with intelligence.
Some of them might be considered marketing geniuses, like Jobs was.
He understood the market and knew what products to put there, I’d say he is a genius at that - but imo a marketing genius would be someone who can sell anything no matter how shitty the product is, so i’d say that term would be better fitting for his competitors at Microsoft for example.
I would rather consider Steve Wozniak than Steve Jobs. Jobs was undoubtedly excellent at selling products, and he was certainly a smart (and also ruthless) businessman, but the pioneer—and the one who actually “did the thing”—was Wozniak.
It’s true, of course, that Wozniak probably wouldn’t have been able to make his product a success on his own, but that’s precisely where the problem lies: Bill Gates is certainly no fool either, but DOS—the product that made Microsoft the billion-dollar-company that it is today—was developed by someone else, namely Gary Kildall. Gates’s achievement consisted mainly of making a lot of money from it. He did just that, and did it well, while Kildall was fobbed off with a ridiculously small sum relative to the product’s success, since he was in a weak position at the time.
Although Gates was far more technically adept than Jobs, his core qualities were essentially the same—a good sence for business and a utter lack of scruples: Kildall never received a bonus payment from Microsoft for his work that would have even remotely acknowledged his importance.
There are many people in the IT sector who are worthy of admiration, but almost none of those who truly deserve it are among those the industry or rather the public celebrates as pioneers or visionaries—these are almost exclusively businesspeople who played only a marginal role, if any, in the development of the products they market.
In my view, success stories like Apple or Microsoft are fundamentally no longer possible today, since visionary spirit, wisdom, and inventiveness have been permanently replaced by the inhuman logic of cutthroat capitalism, which the U.S., above all, embodies. Its heroes are always the wrong ones—not those who have advanced humanity through their achievements, but always those who have known how to exploit others particularly ruthlessly for their own ends. These people lead the Western world today, which is why it stands on the brink of total collapse, since these people know nothing but boundless greed.
They are utterly unfit to lead millions upon millions of people—yet that is precisely what they seek to do in their pathological hubris.
I really think Jobs dying was the start of the tech industry enshittification.
While he was a massive cunt and didn’t personally develop the products, he pushed his people to innovate, and the rest of the industry followed to try to keep up.
Once iPhones became yearly iterative bullshit, the industry followed.
But Moore’s Law slowing down does come into play.
My lay-person perspective is Jobs pioneered enshittification. The iPod was not an mp3 player, you had to use proprietary format music, which needed to be loaded with iTunes, a piece of proprietary software that acted almost like a virus once installed on your machine.
It may be that his death marked a turning point, in a sense: He had already been forced out of his role as CEO by business executives in 1985 and didn’t return until 1997, when the company was on the brink of collapse. He then truly turned the company around through innovation: first with the iPod, then with the iPhone—both products that changed the world. I don’t want to downplay this foresight at all, and I also think that Jobs was someone who cared about the cause—about products that are meaningful and useful.
Nevertheless, I don’t believe the start of enshittification can be pinned to the date of his death. Rather, he was one of those, who laid the groundwork for it—here’s an example: soon, Google will tighten the screws and design the Play Store along the closed model that Apple introduced back in the day.
In short: I think there are many other reasons. Jobs was an outstanding businessman, but he lived in a different world than the one we live in today.
The thing about The Woz is, he showers.
Did you write that wall of text to say that Wozniak was the marketing genius instead of Jobs?
I’m pretty sure they were saying that while Woz was the real genius that made the product, simply making a superior product isn’t a guarantee it’ll be successful.
In reality, you need both people.
Another classic example that proves this:
…Bro wants chess to be Age of Empires? wtf kind of response is this?
What I take from this is “I can’t cheat, so I won’t play”
“I keep losing because this game is TOO SPUPID”
He is talking about when he was young though
It’s written like a deliberate parody of people like him, it’s so ludicrous.
If it’s real, it’s the first tweet by him I’ve seen that’s actually funny. Perfectly leans into the absurdity of that position.
Wow the most cringe comment possible. Amazing. He keeps doing it.
Sounds like Radovid in The Witcher 3. You know, the mad, genocidal king.
In truth hes just a huge fire emblem fan and goons to edelgard or something
My theory is that he’s frustrated that he can’t manage a team or pay someone to get better at it for him.
The humility it takes to be a beginner at something is uncomfortable when you have a huge ego.
I mean, he could very easily do both of those things. Chess teams are a thing, and they need sponsors to be able to attend tournaments - I suppose that counts as “managing” a team. Chess coaches are also a thing, and even some of the worst novice players have seen massive improvement in their chess game after being paired up with famous chess streamers, but without him putting in the actual effort to absorb the information, he’ll never get any better.
When all else fails, he could create an account and pay some broke ass GM to smurf for him. Nobody gets rich off of playing chess for a living, so him paying them to improve his elo and then him taking all the credit publicly would be par for the course and highly effective. Nobody is really going to call him out on that because he has a cult of personality surrounding him that built him up to be a genius. I mean, if you ask him to explain why he made a certain move in a high level game, the illusion would fall apart, but the media wouldn’t dare hold his feet to the fire like that.
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.
I enjoy see sport competitions because I like to see what humans are capable of. I don’t need a so-called genius to prove that we can create robots running faster than humans. Likewise I don’t need to be told that Stockfish is stronger than Carlsen because then what? We should stop playing because a machine is better?
Also, what does “solving chess mean”? We already have algorithms trying every possible move
No no see, we can “solve chess” and find the one path that will always win no matter what.
Then we can stop plahing, duh.
/s
Modern chess players are much stronger than last century precisely because they train against stockfish and use it to analyse the optimal move.
We know what he has against chess, he sucks at it because he is a moron.
Being able to solve checkers doesn’t mean people will stop enjoying playing checkers. It is true that chess could be solved, although you don’t really need to brute force every single possibility ‘by hand’ as that guy implied, but it won’t mean people will stop playing it
you don’t really need to brute force every single possibility
And Elon is reading the correct CS/math blogs by pointing out that only legal moves need to be considered.
If he was a little more on his toes, he might point out that Go has a vastly larger state-space than chess, yet it was one of the first problems that fell to GenAI, which is able to find crazy-complex high-dimensional heuristics/“intuition” navigating such spaces.
Naw it wasn’t genAI, it was the deep learning stuff that came before, when ML was still cool.
when ML was still cool.
God damn I feel that in my bones.
It was one of the first instances of genAI. The team at Google figured out that you take a classifier, flip it round to make a generator, then set it against the classifier to train itself
GAN have been around way before…
I wouldn’t say Go “fell to GenAI”
Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo in historic human victory
The world’s top Go player notches a 2-1 comeback win against the most powerful Go engine, raising hope for human intellect in the AI era
As the article shows, the Pros don’t treat AI the same as a human player and often don’t attack its weaknesses and instead try to find more interesting ways to defeat it and learn more about the game.
“I noticed KataGo tends to match moves if I open on the opposite komoku, but I didn’t want to win that way,” Shin said. Komoku is the Japanese term for the three-to-four point on a Go board.
Although it should be noted that Shin Jin-seo did start with a 2 stone handicap. But this also alters the AI to play more risky moves it wouldn’t normally.
One thing that is super cool about Go is the ability to add a handicap.
A handful of prodigies are still able to sometimes beat the AI.
I count that as solved, the same way a few crumbs on my plate means I have “finished” my meal
Except, Go isn’t a solved game. Which is what we’re taking about here.
Elon doesn’t read anything except social media posts.
Go isn’t a solved game
Depends what you mean by “solved”
Mapped the entire state space so next move is just a lookup in a huge table? No, Universe not big enough.
Game is no longer generally winnable by humans no matter their level of skill? Yes, that happened.
Moving the goalposts.
What I mean is simply the definition of a solved game. From any position, the outcome of the game can be correctly predicted assuming both players play perfect moves from then on.
You’ll note that Go is not on the list, but is down under ‘partially solved’ as it has weak solves (solved under limited conditions) only at a 5x5 and 7x7 board in 2015.
Humans play on a 19x19 board, which is 145 orders of magnitude above 7x7. It’ll not likely be solved by an LLM until it has storage space, RAM, and processing speed several-dozen orders of magnitude larger than all that which currently exists on Earth.
I don’t understand why people play tennis, I can solve tennis without any Ai. All you need is a wall.
I don’t understand why people compete in swimming. A motorized raft could cross that pool so much faster.
I don’t understand why people read anymore. Text to speech has been around for decades.
I don’t understand why people look at sunsets. Realistic photographs have been around for dozens of years.
What do you mean I have multiple psychological disorders? I have a lot of money so I must be perfect.
/s this is all a joke, I understand the concept of having fun and playing
Walls, rafts, and even text to speech are all things that have helped humanity. “Solving chess” will not benefit us at all, it will just be a benchmark to sell to investors.
Well yeah true but not the point. People play chess because they enjoy playing chess. People play tennis, swimming and reading because they enjoy those activities. They don’t need to be “solved” because it’s the act of doing which is the benefit.
In contrast not many people “enjoy” say doing laundry. They enjoy having clean clothes. The end goal is the benefit. People don’t enjoy calculating the standard deviation of 1500 data points. No one is excited on Friday because that weekend they will get to do that. It might be useful for something, may lead to other discoveries, or help them with completing some other task but the result is the goal not the act.
People may be excited because they are going on a hike that weekend. The act of hiking is the goal. People enjoy bike riding. Yeah it’s “solved” since you can just have a car/motorcycle take you anywhere much faster with less effort but people enjoy the act of riding a bike.
I think we are actually saying the same thing
Atleast we both agree that solving chess is stupid goal and should not be done.
Man with no friends doesn’t understand the point of playing a game beyond “solving” and “winning” the game. I wonder why he has no friends.
Psychopath mentality.
It’s so stupid that I wouod make myself stupid by treating it as a serious discussion
If you live in the US, too late on that one. The quality of public discussions has been precipitously declining, and it wasn’t very intelligent before.
Solved or not, computers already smoke even the best chess players in the world. It feels like both of them think people can still compete with computers at chess? What a weird argument.
Chess.com (bad btw) knows that humans can’t compete with computers at chess lmao. That’s not the conversation that’s happening
It’s more that Elon Musk is arguing that “chess is too stupid for me and it will eventually be fully solved” and the other dude is arguing that it’s basically unsolvable given its complexity, and it’s not as simple as he claims.
The history on this is that Elon Musk thinks he’s a super genius and needs to maintain that narcissistic mindset and one really dumb fucking thing that’s come out of that was he claimed he’s above chess because it’s too “simple” and prefers real genius strategy games like RTS.
Now I love RTS but he’s just a narcisstic prick trying to feed his ego and his argument doesn’t go beyond that. He’s not good at chess, probably has a shit ELO, so to convince the world he’s still a super genius he has to provide a good reason why he’s not also a chess grandmaster.
Saying it’s too “simple” and that RTS is more of a showcase kinda solves that conundrum. It allows him to bake in this illusion of being a genius that’s too good for chess, but also probably not great at RTS but in my experience they’re mostly training.
This is narcissist behavior. They fucking love looking like geniuses, especially him. He wants to be seen as this generation’s Tesla, a little boy genius who just opened a rocket science book one day and made the next gen rocket.
Narcissists need to pump up that illusion and anything that proves it might be wrong is sort of emotionally dangerous. In his worldview, geniuses are good at chess, so why isn’t he a natural at it? Well, it’s below him, and it will be fully solved by the AI that the boy genius creates. As dumb as that fucking argument is, it’s all about his ego and maintaining the illusion.
Some irony here is that a not uncommon way to develop an rts or board game is to start with chess and mutate it into something new.
Not even normal RTS, but like a casual mobile RTS. I played polytopia back in the day, it was fun. But I wouldn’t compare it to chess, or even a desktop RTS game.
He’s arguing like a teen.
LMAO “no fog of war, no random maps”
What a fucking petulant child
No, the employee was simply saying the game will not be “solved.” That’s very different from what you said.
Computers can look at a current board state and assess the pros and cons of all available moves considering the next x number of turns, where x is a number much lower than the possible number of turns in a game.
For chess to be solved a computer would need to be able to see the outcome of each move for as many turns as are possible in a game.
Considering how simple ‘Connect 4’ is, chess looks downright impossible by infinite
https://youtu.be/KaljD3Q3ct0(Great video about solving connect 4 by 2swap)
Elon used the old “reword your insult to use back at you.”
Even my friends don’t text me back so fas
Lmaooooo love that reply 🤣
I’d love to see his attempt to ‘solve’ Go like this
