Why are Chess players so cruel?

How does this make you feel?

Google Deepmind has introduced me to the world of Go.
Go is an evolving game, they say Go can't be mastered in a single lifetime, you must study the techniques of past Go players in order to effectively play modern opponents. So you could say high level Go players do progress something, the ancient art of Go.
Maybe chess has a similar trait, that new inventions that last for generations are possible.

I'd let you watch, I would invite you! But the Queens WE use would not excite you

I need to step up my game and start playing chess sideways on a four foot tall board.

I think all the money we spend on pro sports and the sheer physical prowess of pro athletes would be a far more realizable boon to society via either budget or war than trying to assume chest autists will make any major breakthrough or advancement. Like, the fuck is Magnus ever going to do, besides maybe some theoretical physics bullshit at best? But I'll bet someone like Mayweather has enough drive to be in the special forces, if they paid him enough.

black seems to be in checkmate

>implying chess players are smart enough to be anything more than mid-tier accountants
FFS you guys, it's just memorizing some patterns.

>besides maybe some theoretical physics bullshit at best?

>implying that's not one of the single most important things anyone could be doing
If you're seeing comercial results in less than a generation, it's smalltime.

If all the Grand Masters teamed up, they could cure cancer, but nope they'd rather play games instead.

If all the Grand Masters teamed up they maybe could beat my PC at chess.

Why would that matter? What's the endgame? To help the masses? Fuck them. Literally in the billions. Not a single one which isn't replaceable. To help those that could actually use their time, sure, but anything else is a waste.

OwTheEdge.png

This. If you enslave people to do what they don't want to do then all you get is a hollow shell.

Then again, this thread doesn't care about that because it's a troll thread.

It's the same with every game that is competitive. People get really catty. I experience this with Chess with rating dick waving, and even Pokemon when I was unfortunate enough to be into it for a while.

Prove me wrong. You literally cannot. People always go "X should Y so that Z" when they've usually no fucking grounds to tell them what to do. Lets say a cure-all immortality serum is discovered tomorrow. Would we ever hear about it? Of fucking course not. Least not for awhile after from someone "slipping up". That sort of thing would destroy civilization as we know it on several different levels just from its existence being known let alone in practice. There is a point in which "good" just becomes downright destructive. Médecins Sans Frontières is a group in which most would consider it a good thing despite tending to problems that they often therein perpetuate rather than doing the smart thing in several cases and letting them rot or pulling out the roots all together. Mortality is a tool like most of anything else. It does not exist for those so much better off or if it does it is only less so within the confines of their influence. You may think otherwise, but you are wrong.

Sasuga Satan.

You are literally the bad guys from Elysium.

If we killed all disabled people and folks with high medical care costs we'd also generate billions to fund research and improve education freeing up vastly more people to further sciences and inventions

not mentioning arts because arts are in absogoddamlutely no way better for humanity than chess players

in fact, lets force all the creative minds wasting their time on arts to focus on sciences, maybe one of them will have some unconventional insight

If chess players are so smart, why aren't they rich?

>Im-fucking-plying
Good chess players are good at chess- nothing else can be said about them.

He's not wrong tho

The pleb does not matter that much. It is unfortunate but I have no illusions about it. There are plenty of people who are just objectively better than near everyone else and in the long con those people are held back by there being so many other lesser people. Any intelligent species bent on sticking around should eventually reach the point in which they are consolidating all manner of resources including good genetic material so that they can advance or even just maintain. What else is the point? Literally what else? You can't help everyone. It is neither efficient or the smart thing to do to try and make everyone equal as all you will accomplish is bringing down the whole. There is neither the resources, willingness, good will, and far too much conflict to resolve. It has nothing to do with morality and everything to do with numbers. Automation to the greatest extent possible is a start. That would however require plebs to faze out of the workforce and stop having so many kids or in a lot of cases not have them at all. It will almost certainly not happen like that. Sometimes you are required to be the villain to make lasting good. I want to mitigate the amount of suffering not just now but forever and I would allow very terrible things to happen to accomplish that. Even to my determinate. Yet I'm the bad guy.

Not going nearly far enough with this. Complete eradication or bust!

Damn right you're the bad guy. The ultimate triumph of negative utilitarianism is the destruction of all life that might ever suffer in any way. This is not considered an act of virtue by anyone possessing any alternative philosophical position. Being weaselly about your negative utilitarianism, and deciding that the 'better' class of people should live and thrive while their 'lessers' should be slaughtered for their 'own good' merely intensifies your villainy.

Vast majority of chess players will tell you that the pawns are the most important pieces and the whole "sacrifice" thing is utter tosh.

Salty that IBM's trained apes make them look silly all the time.

Machines will make humans obsolete in any form of competition in due time.

that's nothing compared to the impact of the finno-korean hyper war, though, satan

Isn't doing stuff for greater good a "good" act, as opposed to selfish "evil" acts?
Man, alignments are stupid

Why is Chess more purposeless than any other endeavor? With a heavy dose of nihilism, everything is pointless, and maybe there's only so far we can go with science and such anyway.

Even beyond that, this logic bothers me, especially when you try to apply it to other people that devote themselves to 'wastes of time.' Would the world really be better if all the people who play videogames and memorize stats and equations were working as accountants? Would we lose something if the people who spent thousands of dollars at art school instead devoted their time to something more practical?

It makes me want to take this to its horrible end result and create a setting that's a 110% utilitarian dystopia. Probably in its early stages, because if people actually grew up in it they probably wouldn't be unhappy with being used for most efficiency.

And he is right.

Isn't this the case for chess and shogi though?
Mastery, or anything approaching it, can only be achieved by learning and integrating the openings/strategies of those who came before into your own originalities.

Why are collegiate wrestlers so cruel? Ive never seen a chess player push a smaller person down or choke one for his amusement.

>manchild edgetards desperately trying to be sociopaths

If you'd ever got off your fat arses and tried to do some good for the downtrodden, like worked in a soup kitchen for a few hours a week or got in with a church charity project, you'd see that even a little can make a big difference.

I choose to believe he flipped the board and threatened Hatman.

>sheer physical prowess of pro athletes
The money, yes, the amount of money spent on their salaries and stadiums and shit is absurd and could probably be put to far better use. The people themselves are largely irrelevant on a societal scale. They wouldn't notably shift any war, and I'm fairly certain we disagree on whether you can notably advance humanity by murdering people either way.

Theoretical physics breakthroughs would be immeasurably more valuable than almost any number of slightly better soldiers, since soldiers can look flashy and beat up other humans whereas enough science might make us into the fucking Culture or some bullshit eventually.

Personally I'm studying biosciences because I want to be immortal or at least regenerated when I'm old Commonwealth style, but dear god the kind of power we could wield as a species if we could control some aspects of physics is utterly absurd.

U mad tho?

>3967▶
>
>Isn't doing stuff for greater good a "good" act, as opposed to selfish "evil" acts?
>Man, alignments are stupid

Most logical argument I've ever heard for the 9-alignment system:
> Good v. Evil: Do the ends justify the means?
> Law v. Chaos: The order of the society vs the rights of the individual

Chaotic Good is someone who is an individualist who has lines they aren't willing to cross.
Lawful Evil brings order by any means necessary.

What a load of pompous bullshit. If contributions to arts and sciences are more important than the freedom to live, then there's a whole lot of people that should just be removed from society to keep the resources for their "betters".

I consider myself at least somewhat well read and I've never heard the word "sempiternal" used outside side of an album by BMtH, you pretentious git.

And yes, I mad.

>feed some burnt out junkie looking for a free meal and a place to sleep
>he now has the strength to mug, rape, and murder three people

Not all differences are good.

>feed some burnt out junkie looking for a free meal and a place to sleep
>he now has the strength to mug, rape, and murder three shitposters
>all differences are good

>implying he couldn't have just done that anyway had you not fed him
>implying your average junkie wants to mugrapemurder people for no reason in the first place
baka desu senpai

>every single person that goes to a soup kitchen is a junkie that's going to do horrible shit to others

oh user chan. Thats not how most burnt out junkies are.

Would you act that way if you were a burnt out junkie? They are people. Desperate people. The kind of people who will toss unlocked cars in parking lots for change and valuables, but most definitely don't want to see the people they steal from. That is scary shit. Street people die doing that shit. And when you are rock bottom enough to steal from folks you aren't high enough to feel invincible.

>being good at one thing necessarily means you have the capability to be good at anything else
>being smart at a single subject necessarily means you are smart at all subjects

>good at an incredibly specific skill
>necessarily means intelligence because of appearance

Fucking stupid, the lot of you.

>Have a boss that makes the 'I'm a chess master, I'm playing chess with millions of dollars, that's what sales really is' analogy all the time
>Fucking irritates the fuck out of me
>I remember volunteering for a month at a homeless shelter/homeless rehab place in St. Louis when I was in High School
>Volunteer coordinator encourages me to spend time in their rec center just playing games and ping pong to get acquianted
>Thought I was a smart guy
>One guy is playing chess, figure I can take a homeless guy in chess, I know the rules
>Her beats me, no joke, check mate in a handful of moves
>The homeless guy has a good laugh at how he beat educated me when he never even finished high school
>He challenges me to a rematch
>Without his queen
>Beats me in a handful of moves
>I'm humbled

I lost all respect for chess as a barometer for genius strategy, this guy was so fucked up, he had been homeless for decades and is probably dead by now. Being great at chess didn't help him one bit. It's a game, nothing more, it's a metaphor for the idea of mastering something anything, it just contains a lot of memorization that anyone can do.

You sound like a smug little pussy that wouldn't have the balls to do shit to progress your cute little edgelord agenda that you've oh so carefully considered from your mother's basement.

So you think that chess is a bad measurement of intelligence because you dont want to admit that you got outsmarted by a hobo?

This.
I'd bet every dollar I have I can go out on the street right now and pick out someone who's less replaceable than you.
That's the bit about utilitarianism nobody but the blind and arrogant are willing to embrace: Chances are better than not that when the 'culling' comes, you're going to be one of the 90% on the chopping block.

People spend absurd amounts of money of those athletes because they generate absurd amounts of money.

The Soviet Union had a very prominent culture of chess clubs, chess tournaments and it was expected that anyone in college should know how to play.
If even the communists do not suddenly forbid everyone from using their intelligence for leisure in the hopes that they'll get utopian progress as a result, that should probably be a hint that you've gone too collectivist to live.

>on the chopping block.
Of course. That doesn't make it any less factually wrong.

I get my kicks above the waistline, sunshine!

Art have no value.

If chess players devoted themselves to improving useful arts, sciences, and inventions then they'd be squandering their talents. In the long run, we're all dead. The only objective purpose of life is to enjoy it.

Oh oh oh, and while we're at it let's make the science nerds drop their hobbies, after all that's just wasting their intellectual resources on unproductive activities. Get to work you lazy assholes.

Because they're autists who can't into society.

Like most people who base their lives around tabletop games.

>That's the bit about utilitarianism nobody but the blind and arrogant are willing to embrace
You forgot the clinically depressed. We're willing to embrace that part, as well.

One night on Veeky Forums makes a hard man harder.