I personally don't believe the argument that search with a bad model helps so much. In e.g. an open position with lots of possibilities you would need an insane amount of calculations to beat a positional/strategic player with a bad engine.
It all depends on the nuances of the search and the board evaluation. I've done a traditional search based engine, you can try playing against it. It plays out as you mention, you beat it positionally. But tbh if you play against a search only engine without heuristics but with a more optimized algorithm, you may still fail to penetrate it unless you know anti engine strategy.
lichess.com/@/TotomiBot
It's currently uses a 3ply exhaustive search, with the exception that takes don't count toward the ply limit, so it actually evaluates all branches up until the third non taking move.
On the evaluation, it uses two separate scoring values, one for material, using Lasker style piece values, and another for tiebreaking, which would be the positional score.
Positional score is mostly determined by a bitboard with for each piece type, with positive and negative biases towards specific squares, for exmaple the king bishop pawn is heavily incentivized to stay put. The boards are perspective based, so it works the same if you are black or white without needing symmetry (which would make promotion strategies hard).
There's also a couple of heuristics for king safety.
The complexity has come to a point where it's hard to predict what will improve or make it worse by just fiddling with the heuristics. But there's probably a lot of room for improvement in terms of reducing and optimizing compute time.
AI is python based but calculation (search) and evals are offloaded to a c lib for efficiency.
ELO is around 1400, and you can pretty much only beat it positionally (or with a very aggressive early sacrifice. As there's almost no hanging of pieces.
While our agricultural sector does use cheap labor, I specifically take issue with the word "needed". I may be nitpicking, but read a certain way it implies the "cheap" aspect of the labor is the essential part.
Certain industries employing quasy-slave labor to this day and getting away with it is one thing only: a stain on our society.
Long has been the fight for freedom from oppression and it is not over yet. Just like Martin Luther King was assassinated fighting for colored civil rights, Cesar Chavez was assassinated fighting for humane conditions for immigrant workers.
If immigrants are what's "needed" for America to function then they should be naturalized and granted fair wages just like anyone else.
Actually most of the stuff on the internet I really enjoyed was non profit driven. What really destroyed it imo is the attention seeking attitude that results from earning money with advertisements.
That would've happened regardless. But the alternative --- zero moderation, 100% free speech --- is how you get flamewars and spam like Slashdot and tons of other forums before it suffered from.
I've gotten into plenty of flamewars with Dems, Republicans, Anti-Vaxxers, Pro-Vaxxers, AI Luddites, AI Fundamentalists, China bots, China hawks, Apple fanatics, Apple haters, far-right, far-left, pro-WFH, anti-WFH, pro-immigration, anti-immigration, and others on HN.
I just don't care about filtering my opinions and use HN as a way to kvetch and impart some information I may know about.
I also think that the quality declined with the incoming AI crowd but on the other hand I also got older over the last years and increased my own skill level...
There is in France a kind of shared network of hot water used to heat up our homes (well, those that are connected and paying into the system at least). Part of the system works by burning trash and capturing the heat in the process. Supposedly they also work on using renewable energies to do the work.
Some people argue that the whole system is going against the objectives of recycling stuff but at least it's better than just burning it to get rid of it.
This kind of reply is so cliché it's tiresome. "Someone makes small step to avoid waste and environmental damage" -> "if it's not perfect it's no good at all, let the free market sort it out at t=infinity".
Guess what, the free market doesn't give a shit as long as the executives make their millions.
Where even are all the people wandering around naked for lack of clothes? There's so much donated clothing already out there. And the homeless here mainly 'need clothes' because they have no way to wash their clothes. It'd be less wasteful to get them access to laundry facilities. And the developing world always gets the "PATRIOTS - Super Bowl LX Champions" gear and a ton of other cast-offs - I doubt they need more.
To me this whole regulation sounds like a bunch of virtue-signaling politicians wanted to pat themselves on the back.
If I had that kind of hustle, I'd be finding out who exports the losing teams T-shirts and reimport them. I'm sure some Pats fans would pay $50 a shirt to live in an alternative reality.
