Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | tweakimp's commentslogin

If you want to see human written bots in action or compete in the bot ladder yourself, try https://aiarena.net/

Whenever I see another Stockfish update I dream of the day that I sit down and code my own chess bot that is good enough to beat me. I would be so happy if I manage to do that.


Depending on your feelings on being spoiled on the general techniques, and an approach to implement them, Sebastian Lague made a great two-part series on building a chess engine. It's specific enough that you have an idea of the techniques involved, without dwelling enough with the details to make implementing your own futile.

https://youtu.be/U4ogK0MIzqk


Join the Stockfish discord server! There is a very active community who builds their own chess engines there.

(If you ever end up going for it, don't use AI it takes away a lot of the fun)


Wouldn't be that hard in my case


Same. Probably a few if-then statements would be enough to beat me :'(


I could hard code it to play the fried-liver and I'd still probably trip myself up occasionally.


Beaten by rand() chess


I did so and roughly twenty years later, my 4th attempt is "finished" in a sense and playing on lichess bots from time to time.

The process is very rewarding and there are great resources (chessprogramming wiki). To get an initial bot play random moves is not that much work but it is a good starting point because you can hook it into a gui and watch.

From there you do the move generator and the search and then optimization possibilities are endless :)


To me, the most interesting part is the architecture of the engine. How you encode a position or a move, how you design the move generator, etc.

Something as simple as encoding the 64-square board in a 64-bit number leads to a rabbit hole that can last years.

After that point, the "AI" part is already solved and you just need to implement it (alpha-beta + all the heuristics).

Most of the recent chess engines simply implement a neural network (by copying Stockfish) and suddenly are at 3000 elo with no effort! Such a waste.


Naive monte carlo on a phone from 10 years ago is likely enough unless you're quite good at chess


It's a fun project, start here: https://chessprogramming.org

This may add fuel to the theory (?) that Trump is a russian asset.


Can we stop with this already? American oligarchs are perfectly able to destroy the country on their own. And they've been very transparent about their intentions to do so for a long time.


Both can be true. Trump and family do have very deep Russian connections in terms of financing. That's very true. His own sons have admitted it. Trump has said he loves Russian banks.

American oligarchs are also schmoozing trump, clearly, because he's an easy mark.


You could use it as negative reinforcement to tell the next big AI model what it should not do


Somebody makes a lot of money and generates a lot of power with it.


Until now I thought it was boots-trapped. I am not a native speaker :)


The idiom is to "pull oneself up by one's boot straps":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bootstrapping#Etymology


Thanks!


Does this mean religion can be good for the third of the population that needs an imaginary character to be good?


of course. this experiment is not novel. in the courts witness would swear on the bible (not sure now).

Heard this from an Indian friend, and not sure how much of this true - Indian cities used to have problem of folks chewing tobacco and spitting everywhere, so in some places they would have an icon of a Hindu god, and it worked (maybe not with non-hindu).


> Heard this from an Indian friend, and not sure how much of this true - Indian cities used to have problem of folks chewing tobacco and spitting everywhere, so in some places they would have an icon of a Hindu god, and it worked (maybe not with non-hindu).

Probably worked with non-hindu as well; after all, people don't usually spit on or in front of religious idols even if those idols are from a different religion.


You don't need to be religious to not spit in front of an idol... I mean if someone put their bag there you would also not spit there. The experiment needs to be repeated with more items!


The "minimum viable product" is part of the development process. If you are already at a certain quality and choose to make it worse, this is something else. Enshittification or just greed come to my mind.


The “minimum” means minimum price. There is a big market for the lowest price product in case a customer wants the lowest quality product because they only need to use it a couple times or for a trivial task.

Buying a cheap tool at Harbor Freight first and then going for the more expensive tool is a good way to save money.


> The “minimum” means minimum price.

But "worse on purpose" products typically decrease the quality (and cost to make) without decreasing the sale price to match. It's exploiting the product's reputation for being premium not minimum.


Clearly it's just the start and end state of product development: make an MVP—the very worst thing people will buy, start to gain market share while you improve, reach market saturation, merge with competition, "value engineer" back to MVP—the very worst thing people will still buy.


The contributors are already compensated by the ads the are allowed to see.


What exactly changed?


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: