Many of the people at this site do not live under self regulating forms of government. They are used to being micro-managed and prefer it that way, not because they like it but because they are used to it and they have learned how to deal with it. (I'm talking about regional politics) There really is a different way of thinking and dealing with problems here, and the people who vent their anti-US crap here are even more welcome at this site than they are at a liberal US site. Someone didn't like me throwing the anti-US crap I had to listen to back at someone else who was baiting me, so the mod had me banned. The guy who baited me is still allowed to post there and I'm still banned. I'll always be a "brain-pawn" here until I'm banned from the site or decide to leave, because there is no way I will ever voluntarily pay for being treated this way. At IYT people are respected enough to regulate themselves, and they don't have to put up with moderators who have an agenda or a personal ax to grind.

Good luck with your site Fencer. Any experimenting will have its up and downs. I suppose I could have warned you about peer moderated boards before you put those in effect, but this is your baby and I'm not the one who changes the diapers around here. IYT has a better way of letting people regulate the boards, there is less fussing with complainers and fewer personal complaints management has to deal with.

Bye y'all

harley: Could a feature like that be added without over extending the server Fencer is currently using?

Actually, I'm fascinated by the use neural nets that playBunny was talking about. Are neural nets something current PCs can use, or are already using? I'm hopelessly behind in knowing what's up with PC capability, in case you hadn't already guessed that. Neural nets are the logical way to go in creating an artificial intelligence, although the home grown all natural organic ones are still the best and most reliable neural nets on the planet...I need some sleep.

myfanwy: //RRRRRRRR that doesnot compute/ RRRRR/ please rephrase input.port/slash/?

Caissus: I don't know how it was done, but someone (I've already named him, so it's too late to keep him anonymous) took one of my completed game and analysed the opponents side of it. It came back with a high 90 percentile probability (something over 95%) of being entirely played by a computer. We both suspected he was using a computer, but he also had quite an extensive knowledge of the game, so it is possible we could have both been wrong. The individual in question also had an extensive knowledge of everything there is to know in the known unverse, but whenever I questioned him regarding matters I am familiar with he would simply repeat what he was harvesting off google. I caught him posting entire passages from sites by entering suspicious looking text he posted as his own thoughts into google. No reason for me to think he wasn't cheating in chess games as well, he played perfect book openings and the games were flawlessly thematic(?). I'm definitely a flawed player, and I'm still not sure what the word thematic is supposed to mean, even though it's been expained to me a few times.

But you're right about occassional use of a program. There's really no way to see the difference between a computer move and a sudden flash of brilliant insight. Besides, those sudden flashes can be painful if you have sensitive eyeballs.

Uh oh..smoke coming out of my..

My earhairs are on fire!!

playBunny: My neural net is overheating.

Good grief! I think it's bad enough some of the discussion boards are micro-managed to the point it doesn't pay to say anything other Hello, hi there, how are you today. Oh, I'm fine, thanks for asking. Did I offend you? I'm sorry.

But there's no feasible way for Fencer to micro-manage how games between individuals are played. Think about it, some one could be claiming to use a program even if he isn't using one. Reverse psychology, fake em out by suggesting they are a using a resource they really aren't using. It could be the player using one and admitting it doesn't know they are doing anything wrong, or doesn't know he should have said so from the start. That's possible too. A cheater who knows he's cheating won't tell on himself, so I doubt anyone claiming to use a computer thinks of it as cheating.

By the way, there are programs that can analise a chess game and compute the probability of a chess program being used. AD used something like this to analise a game I played at IYT, so I know these sort of programs exist.

There are worse things going on here than losing to a machine. I gave up playing chess for awhile, because sometime during the middle game of one match I was able to turn a lost game into a winning one. After that my opponent took advantage of our 7 days per move, and would only move after the seven days were nearly up. I aways use the 7 days/per as insurance, to make sure nothing happends to cause either one of us to time out. The game started last August, I think, but wasn't over until about January or Febuary. It's annoying tactics like this that can ruin the fun for me.

I know that I've played programs with players who don't tell me it's a program, you can almost always tell when that happens because a machine "thinks" differently, and it never makes the sort of errors people will make. People can have good days or bad days, and play can be affected by how they are feeling and for other reasons, but computers always play with a machine-like consistency.

philip: Exactly my point. Odds are always in favor of the house if you don't count cards, but they can't know you are doing that unless you win too many hands or unless they are psychic and can literally read your mind. If you consistently win then they will know you have system to overcome the house advantage.

The idea of card counting doesn't work in backgammon though, because each time you roll there's nothing to add or subtract from the previous roll. The real thinking here is in guessing your best position based on what could happen in the next roll, and each next roll has the same possibilities. I'm not a computer guy or know much about game theory, but I am mildly autistic...

he he he he..I can't wait to see the response to this. :_

Jason: I don't know how a program like that can work either, but a person and a program would have one thing in common...Neither one can know for certain what the next numbers will be, but only what they could be and how it could affect your position. It seems to involve a lot of what if thinking, but nothing as precise as the kind of thinking needed in chess. In chess I know why I'm making a move, in backgammon it's more a matter of knowing what could happen next.

People using programs to cheat usually don't tell on themselves, so maybe there is another reason he told you he using a program. Anyone using a program learns little about playing, but for some people winning is more important than anything else. I've played chess with people I know were using programs for making moves. They aren't weren't smarter after playing with programs than they were before they started, so as far as I am concerned I'm not the one who loses something.

Why would he tell you he was cheating if he was really cheating?

Andre Faria: You're the reason I was hidden for ahwile, not the reason I was banned. LOL Okay harley I'm done with this, and thanks for taking the time to listen to me privately.

Andre Faria: LOL Well, you can't PM now, as I'm sure you already know, so hearing from you privately won't be a problem anymore.

I should have been wise enough to know what was happening at the time, and put you on my enemies list right away. Live and learn, eh?

bwildman: Uniformity is not possible. I agree mods don't all opperate by the same standards or use the same exact proceedures but to think they all would is to ignore the "human factor". They aren't computers. I was put on hide, then let back in, then banned without an explaination. I found a mod who might help me understand what happened and she told me what I wanted to know. It turns out I was banned for the same post I'd been hidden for previously. I posted a PM from someone who was taunting me privately for baiting he was doing publically and I posted his PM on the general chat board. At least now I know why I was hidden and then subsequently banned. I won't ask to get back on because I know who the mod was (no, it not's you hannalore) who has something personal against me. It could happen again, and without warning, so I figure why bother. Anyone who thinks life is supposed to be fair hasn't lived for many years. You have to factor who you're dealing with in anything you do. That's the way it is. No hard feelings or anything, I just like knowing where I stand and that's good enough for me.

Evil Bratt: Yes, but you will need something sharp to scratch it with.

Sorry, I came straight here from the jokes boards...

Do you mean build it from stratch? Using parts to build your own PC?

Jules: Put the prankster on block. There's no reason for a mod to put up with that.

Cranky Franky: Miss wet T-shirt? What's that?

Jules: Are you getting messages from someone who is blocking you? Why are they doing that?

Jules: What duties? Are you a moderator?

Jules: Yes. It would be fair of you to block them too.

EdTrice: I have seem him do that too.

EdTrice: At the Quantum level everything does happen,

...it happens often enough to produce the same stable patterns and a stable universe. The bell jar pattern happens randomly, but it's always a bell jar shape. I know this isn't a physics or science board but..why isn't there one of those here?

Just a thought.

Hrqls: In backgammon it shouldn't matter because the "randomness" is the same for both players, but it can mess someone up who is used to a more random kind of randomness.. lol.. it doesn't take much to mess me up.

You can predict with more than random accuracy what might happen in a game of backgammon. If bumping a piece back exposes the attacking piece, then odds are good for getting a number that can bump that piece back. That's normal, but I've seen more doubles and big numbers nearer the end of games than at the beginning. There should be no discernible pattern after several games. 10 doubles in a roll I can believe but not a pattern showing up in 10 successive games. Again, I'm not complaining and the fact is this could just be my imagination talking.

An artificial intelligence can't play well against a moderately experienced player. Thinking in backgammon is much more intuitive than chess. There isn't a program that can beat the best backgammon players in the world, not even close.

Hrqls: Build computers with mechanical arms that can shake and roll the dice. A scanner can read and enter perfectly random numbers into the game.

How much is the prize?

I thought I was seeing a pattern, but I guess it was just my imagination. Real dice aren't influenced by board position, so I was wondering if the rolls here were being influenced in any way. I'm not complaining BTW, but I was curious about this.