I’d like to bring back the score estimator topic, as in the old topics, I didn’t find so much criticism on the “external help” side of the tool.
OGS has a strong policy against using AI or any other external help like a stronger player for example. The use of not dynamic and established help like a joseki database is accepted.
Now what about the score estimator? When assessing a position, it’s not only about points. By not taking in account some areas, he may give precious clues about weaknesses, what is territory or not, the possibility of some local tesuji… He can really act like an external help, not just a counting machine for lazy players.
Of course he’s not so good as we should dream, but still I find it quite useful.
And this external and dynamic help is completely allowed and integrated, with just an option to disable it. In some way it’s even more a cheating tool as the analysis tool which won’t check for you what is points and what is still to discuss.
Shouldn’t the OGS policy be a bit more consistent and put the score estimator in the same box as the AI?
Yes @Lys I see that. And I wrote from the beginning that you can disable it of course.
I’m surprised how players can’t be honest and keep thinking it’s the same as analysis tools.
You can have fun with some cheating after all no need to cover the tool by it’s weaknesses…
OGS don’t do it yet but a score estimator with AI quality is not fantasy, so a bit of debate won’t harm afterall
So now you outright call people who use score estimator cheaters.
Anyone even slightly stronger than me who thinks SE is of any significant help should return their DDK/SDK status (I don’t expect a Dan to blurt out something like that) and put on back their training wheels, because obviously they don’t have basic reading skills.
If we could avoid playing with words I know that SE is part of OGS tools ofc and that’s not the sense as I said I put in “external”.
In my interpretation of the TOS, OGS don’t want users to get information to use in their own game which is computed outside their brain, especially adapted information, and that’s in some way, with it’s yet low quality, what SE may provide.
When an area is grey out, and even more if SE was better, I could change my mind, follow it’s external advice and find that I had a wrong assessment on that area
So, in your interpretation, OGS implemented a tool that goes against what they want.
@yebellz I agree about the parts during the game, but I strongly suggest a good, reliable SE would be useful for the scoring phase. Yes, reading is good etcetcetcetcetc, but please keep in mind the beginners and the people who just want to enjoy Go. A good score estimate in a finished game helps people check their skills and avoids conflict.
@Gia yes. They can have good reason for that, like that many users like it.
Now being sizing the low quality of SE to minimize the cheating is a no way to me, or how will you explain then why so many want to keep it? For wallpaper on their screen?
We should call a horse a horse. For a intermediate player, he will refute many times the assessment of the SE of today but sometimes SE may point out something wrong. And that’s what I call cheating, using something else to assess and then play.
Then it’s even obvious there is a problem as said in other posts: do we really want a better SE?
“Cheating” is a strong word but I don’t use it for the sake of hurting, no offense, but in the idea to start by some reality to get somewhere.
Here is my (grossly over-generalized) take on reading this thread:
MORE EXPERIENCED PLAYERS: All of these tools that players now have make it too easy to do things. Everyone should learn those things in the slowest and most mentally challenging way, because (1) the honor of the game demands it, (2) it forces you to do everything in your own head so you actually become a better player, and (3) that’s the way I learned it, so it’s the only valid way.
LESS EXPERIENCED PLAYERS: But we’re just using these tools to help us achieve the same goals. We are trying to learn to do all this complex stuff in our heads, but these tools actually help. Just because we’re not learning it the same way doesn’t mean it’s not valid.
MORE EXPERIENCED PLAYERS: Nope - unless you do everything 100% by yourself then you’re not measuring up to some arbitrary metric of what a Real Go Player Should Be - which are suspiciously close to what I am familiar with, and should therefore be the rule for everyone. Anything less than that, and you are [cheaters, slackers, not putting in enough effort, take your pick]