Cheating at chess how to counter it

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Brian-E

If top international chess is unable to allay suspicions of cheating in its tournaments and matches, I think it could be doomed. Or am I being too pessimistic?

One simple solution: have all participants play naked, inside a faraday cage....

[xilman]

Originally Posted by chalsall

One simple solution: have all participants play naked, inside a faraday cage....

... listening to the output of a computer embedded within their body, and I don't mean the usual one located in the skull.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by xilman

... listening to the output of a computer embedded within their body, and I don't mean the usual one located in the skull.

Computers need power.

[science_man_88]

Originally Posted by chalsall

Computers need power.

computer something that computes aka a brain abacus calculator, desktop,laptop, etc.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by science_man_88

computer something that computes aka a brain abacus calculator, desktop,laptop, etc.

...all take power to work.

Your point?

[xilman]

Originally Posted by xilman

... listening to the output of a computer embedded within their body, and I don't mean the usual one located in the skull.

Ok, that was a slightly flip response.

But only slightly. Face it, as hardware gets faster, smaller and more energy efficient and algorithms get stronger, finite games of pure skill become ever easier to play perfectly.

Back in the good old days, Noughts and Crosses (on the left side of the pond) and Tic-Tac-Toe (on the other side) could be played perfectly by anyone without technological assistance. The 3-dimensional equivalent, when I started playing it, was thought to be a first-player win but no-one knew for sure. These days the lookup table for perfect play could easily be stored inside the human body. Even without tables, algorithms running on a 4MHz 8-bit Z80 with a few kilobytes of memory could beat >90% of human players >90% of the time back in 1982. A Raspberry Pi is many thousands of times faster and has many thousands of times more memory. It's easily small enough to be fitted internally; a custom device could be swallowed.

I see no reason why chess shouldn't go the same way, given time.

[akruppa]

The obvious solution to playing against chess computers is chess boxing.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by xilman

I see no reason why chess shouldn't go the same way, given time.

I assume you are aware of Deep Blue?

Would you like to play a game of Go sometime?

[science_man_88]

Originally Posted by chalsall

...all take power to work.

Your point?

an abacus only needs the power of a human finger, as p=W/s and W=f*d that's really the only way I see it as needing power as it's not electronic/electric and yes I know these have a difference just like something can be digital and yet not be electric etc.

[Dubslow]

Originally Posted by chalsall

One simple solution: have all participants play naked, inside a faraday cage....

Rule 34! (Aka: There are some parts of the internet that would find this to be an "incredibly interesting" proposal!)

[xilman]

Originally Posted by chalsall

I assume you are aware of Deep Blue?

Would you like to play a game of Go sometime?

You assume correctly.

I've played Go in the past and am well prepared to play again in the future, though it would not be a very impressive match. A Go computer would thrash me soundly. I barely know the rules. Believe it or not, I own a moderately nice Go set. I've played against SWMBO; our overall standing could perhaps be best described as "draw by mutual incompetence".

My point remains: eventually Go computers will become as powerful as Go humans. At least, I see no a priori reason why that should not be the case.