2022: HOLD MY TEA! 🍵


a) reality trumps movies, we live in a sci-fi saga and we don’t even appreciate it :stuck_out_tongue:
b) did we just run out of borders on Earth to try our weaponry?


I used to be amazed by everything related to space exploration, but in the last few years NASA has been scaring and depressing me more than anything else.

When Trump was elected, he got rid of NASA administrator Charles Bolden. I think this was a great loss for NASA. It’s also somewhat unprecedented; from what I could find out, it looks like the dates of change of NASA administrators mostly do not coincide with the dates of change of American presidents. But I suppose it’s not possible to have a Black NASA administrator under a racist president.

And then I watched the Crew Dragon launch, and it was appalling. All the American journalists had to say about it was “This is so great, for the very first time in history we can have a full Americano-American launch, without any need for international cooperation”. They kept repeating that over and over again during the whole event. As far as I’m concerned, international cooperation in space exploration is pretty much the best thing about space exploration, and played a role in ending the Cold War. But somehow they all decided to forget about that and instead of making speeches about the marvels of space, they decided to make speeches about nationalism.
And then NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine, who was physically a body double of Trump (I’m not kidding - I’m pretty sure he explicitly told his make-up and hairdressing assistants “make me look like Trump”), made his speech. Made me want to puke. He didn’t talk about space at all, he just celebrated Trump. He explained what great a president Trump was, and what great a nation the USA were, and circled around with a bunch of nationalist and borderline xenophobic arguments. Apparently he completely forgot that he was as a space launch and was supposed to talk about NASA and space.

And now this. Exploding space probes into asteroids. I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised that we keep inventing new ways to be destructive.


You can watch the stream (just skip through for clips of the game) and see what you think yourself.

I don’t think it was quite the Hikaru no Go picture you’re imagining.


A 6h stream… I would like some timestamps…

1 Like

It would probably take me longer to timestamp every time they show the Carlsen - Niemann game than to just scrub through it quickly and stop if it looks interesting :stuck_out_tongue:

Edit: though I’m assuming youtube will show a mini preview of the frame as you scroll - if it doesn’t then maybe I’ll consider timestamping, but genuinely it’ll take a long while.

I’m on mobile, it’s a pain to navigate YT videos.

I didn’t ask for all timestamps, maybe one or two to get a feeling of the argument.

1 Like

I agree.

Politics aside, scientists must cooperate, share and crosscheck scientific finds, if they want to advance. They can’t avoid it, it’s part of the scientific process.

start stop
9:37 10:18
11:13 11:40
12:20 13:51
20:13 25:08
37:22 40:20
44:20 47:52
1:06:04 1:14:02**
2:00:44 2:03:06
2:13:21 2:21:20**
2:36:24 2:38:19
2:46:19 2:48:20
2:49:12 2:49:57
3:06:44 3:08:24
3:12:05 3:20:04**
3:31:03 3:33:21
3:35:46 3:37:16
3:46:43 3:47:34
3:52:07 3:54:55
3:58:39 4:05:35
4:07:53 4:11:13
4:13:02 4:14:29
4:19:08 4:23:14
4:30:13 4:40:45 - gg
4:45:07 5:02:29 - hans interview

That’s probably even harder than just all the timestamps - because I still need to possibly rewatch it all and judge whether it might support the argument or not :stuck_out_tongue:

I’ve put asterisks beside the longer segments - there’s breaks in the commentary for like 8 minutes where they just show the players Hans + Magnus game, maybe they’re good ones? There’s a long segment at the end of the game as well.


lol is all i can say

1 Like

Personally I am in support of this expedition / experiment and don’t think it is a part of militarization / weaponization of space

Sure it involves an explosion but the idea behind is not creating space weaponry but rather getting confirmed experimental data about what happens to an asteroid’s orbit and trajectory when it is impacted in this manner.

In the event that we discover another asteroid headed for Earth like the one that took out the dinosaurs or even another Tunguska it’s better to have more information about what we could do to avoid impact.

The DART mission even has international cooperation - the follow-up mission to Didymos is being handled by the ESA.


It really wasn’t. I found this video which is a review of the game:

I am unranked in Chess and this made a lot more sense than some reviews of Go pro games (a game in which I am much better), so I really do not see what moves they found to be soooooooooo inconcievable that there had to be cheating involved. It is 2 hours on the clock, those people are the best in the world, it is very much reasonable that they actually thought the things the reviewer mentions.


That could be a testament to the person reviewing the video though, rather than the simplicity of the highest level of Chess :stuck_out_tongue:

Edit: The other thing you can do is watch Hans’ interview after the game, and there’s a bunch of things that still seemed a bit complicated, ways for White to hold in certain positions that presumably neither Niemann or Carlsen could see in the game even with 2 hours.


FWIW (not much), I don’t not believe that Guy 2 cheated.

I tend to respect instinct, and believe it’s more often than not an expression of very fine-tuned experience.

kinda OT, expanding on instinct

I think we’ve mentioned this here before, about the “butterflies in the stomach” some people experience when they meet a person that ultimately harms them, usually abuses or even kills them. The more scientific explanation is that those “butterflies” are actually their fight or flight response, reacting to signs that that person is dangerous. But they are conditioned to explain it as “omg romance!!!” and basically don’t listen to their instinct, with tragic results.

Guy 1’s instinct probably pings because his experience caught something in the air. If he removed his ego from the situation and stopped expecting everyone to just believe him because it’s the World Champion speaking, maybe he could be able to find a few coherent arguments and put them in a convincing line about why his opponent cheated.
If he can’t calmly, rationally find such arguments, maybe he should just accept defeat (and defeat) and drop it.

The possibility that he’s just annoyed he lost is very much still on the table.


The moves look rather normal. Although the endgame seems extraordinary, it doesn’t seem unreasonable for high-end play.

I have come to this controversy late, as I haven’t followed chess since Kasparov retired. I read the allegation that Niemann had cheated before, previous to the Carlsen controversy. Is that true? If so, why is he allowed to continue to play in FIDE events? Have his recent games been checked with AI? Has his ascent in the ranks been consistent?

The rage video that @Allerleirauh posted above suggests to me a person of the sort that I would most expect to cheat. Of course, it is also true that high-level chess has had a number of strange personalities in its history.


I haven’t followed it either, twitter suggested me Magnus’ letter. But it’s definitely not just one game people randomly got upset about, there’s history. It seems he rose rapidly, he admitted to cheating in casual online games at some point some time ago, plus people analyzed his games with engine and some percent numbers they find suspicious (you could find spreadsheets).


Thanks. I don’t speak French, but this video apparently has the kind of analysis I was wondering about, judging from the translated comments indicating substantial grounds for suspicion.

1 Like

There’s slightly less French version, slightly. To be honest, I kinda can’t get my head into it.


There was some really fun interviews that came out of the Sinquefield Cup, not just Hans’ ones, but something like Alireza Firouzja’s (world #4) one after managing a draw with Hans in round 4.

The end of the interview they want to ask him about a line they looked at, and he said he didn’t even see the idea to start with, only Hans told him after the game :stuck_out_tongue:

I don’t think 2 hours for the first 40 moves is enough time to see everything :slight_smile:


Oh, quite so! The review was very well made and I didn’t say that they were simple moves, but that I found them very reasonable for the highest level of players.

For example, do you remember that Lee Sedol move against AlphaGo where everyone, even the pros, went “wooooow, how did Lee Sedol think of that, this is awesome!” … this game didn’t really have something that would make you say “good GOD, is this even possible during a live game?”

Super high level of play, yes. Not simple at all, true, but not on the “so baffling that there had to be cheating involved” level. :slight_smile:

Of what I’ve heard he has only cheated online. Even if that is true, even in every other sport, even with heavy cheating and doping involved, it is very rare to get banned for life. Usually you get a year or two out. Wasn’t there a similar issue recently with a young pro in Go? I think the punishment was finite and not “for life”.

Only e-sports have perma-bans as far as I know.

You made me remember of Tyler1 who would make Niemann look like a sleepy hedgehog busking in the sun, but having rage issues or being very passionate about something or being addicted to an activity/hobby, doesn’t make you a more likely cheater. I does look bad though on your resume, not going to argue there :stuck_out_tongue: