You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Tordmor comments on Leveling IRL - level 1 - Less Wrong Discussion

20 Post author: cousin_it 09 August 2011 05:12PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (91)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: [deleted] 09 August 2011 08:59:30PM 4 points [-]

The list has some glaring omissions, like math or chess, because I don't yet know of a crisp enough way to test those skills. Ideas are welcome!

Go is a much better game than chess and lends itself much better to measure progress since it already has a grading scale. Gnugo: http://www.gnu.org/s/gnugo/gnugo.html is said to play around 7-5kyu on a 9x9 board so on level 1 you should be able to always beat it with a 6 stone handycap.

Comment author: syllogism 10 August 2011 12:01:46AM *  8 points [-]

I can play chess at about a club level, and I have to ask: why should a "Level 1 Human" be able to play chess? I think it's purely recreational, because any skills it teaches could be learned much more efficiently some other way. And as recreation, it really only appeals to a certain kind of mind.

At a beginner level chess is an incredibly frustrating game. Chess games between beginners are very seldom decided by higher-level strategy. Instead, it's all about who messes up and allows the opponent a free capture. So the game's dominated by constant, error-free vigilance. I always liked chess, but it's no mystery to me why most people never found it much fun.

Comment author: Morendil 10 August 2011 12:13:50AM 2 points [-]

Go is a much better game than chess

Being a Go player, I'd have to agree. However, be aware that most Go players advise against playing computer programs for any length of time, as this is said to instill bad playing habits.

For owners of Windows PCs I've found IgoWin a really nice learning tool.

A quicker way of establishing one's rank is an online server like KGS. Get a registered account, play a few rated games with random opponents, and in a short time you'll get a statistically reliable rating (though valid only within KGS, you can't compare across rating systems directly).

Warning: I've found Go to be an extremely addictive game, playing a major role in my akratic episodes, especially online blitz games. I managed to quit once, fell off the wagon, and have now managed to quit online playing again, with some difficulty. I'm not saying that Go causes akrasia, but it certainly doesn't help if you already have that sort of issues.

Comment author: anonym 10 August 2011 03:03:37AM *  2 points [-]

Go is a much better game than chess.

You mean, "I like go much more than chess", or "I think chess is a much better game than chess".

Oh, and it's not true that Go lends itself much better to measure progress. Chess has rating systems like the ELO rating system, which measure progress very well.

Comment author: handoflixue 10 August 2011 08:55:27AM 1 point [-]

I think you meant to say "I think you probably meant to convey..." ;)

(Down-voted for pushing the use of "I" statements)

Comment author: anonym 11 August 2011 02:36:09AM 3 points [-]

Yes, I should have said that. Thanks.

On the question of "I" statements though, there is a big difference between "Go is a much better game than chess", and "Go has a much larger state space than chess" (or even "Go is a more complex game than chess"). The former is in the same class of statement as "Chocolate ice cream is much better than vanilla ice cream".

What is the benefit of communicating "I prefer Go to Chess" as "Go is a better game than Chess"? It's less clear, less accurate, and it is likely to confuse many people into accepting that it's a statement about the games in general rather than a statement about one person's taste.

Comment author: handoflixue 11 August 2011 06:05:29PM -2 points [-]

"Chocolate ice cream is much better than vanilla ice cream"

This is how people often talk, even if it's not ideal. I think the confusion generated here is likely to be minimal, so it's not worth policing. I doubt any vanilla fans went "oh, goodness, I've been wrong all this time" :) Even my roommate fails to be swayed by that one, even though I'm very insistent that her loyalty to vanilla is tragically misplaced.

Comment author: anonym 12 August 2011 03:48:31AM 2 points [-]

The example "Go is a much better game than chess" is much more likely to confuse, and that was the original phrase I objected to. Sure, if somebody thinks about it carefully, they'll realize it hides a value judgment, but as maybe you're aware, people don't consciously analyze everything they read and hear -- and things that are seen or thought about in passing often influence us in ways we are unaware of. I'm not trying to say there was a crime or anything or that one should never say a statement like "Go is a much better game than chess", but am I so out of place to actually point out that it's misleading?

Anway, you're downvoted for pushing obfuscation and then neglecting to even engage with the substance of my comments.

Comment author: handoflixue 12 August 2011 07:40:31PM 0 points [-]

Anway, you're downvoted for pushing obfuscation and then neglecting to even engage with the substance of my comments.

I suppose I'm not sure how I failed to engage with your last comment on the thread of "I" statements. I personally don't consider "I" statements that obfuscated, and that was my response - at least where I'm from, they're a normal communication route, and not terribly misleading. It's just a conversational shorthand, because "I think you probably meant to convey..." is a bulky, awkward phrase.

"you're downvoted because I think you're pushing obfuscation and then it feels to me like you're neglecting to even engage"... you see? It's a bloody awkward linguistic standard, and you're not even using it yourself.

Upvoted because I appreciate that you are engaging me, and don't want it to come off like I have hard feelings here.

Comment author: cousin_it 09 August 2011 09:05:55PM *  0 points [-]

Nice! How much time does it usually take a beginner to reach that level?

Comment author: cata 11 August 2011 06:16:47PM 0 points [-]

I think the parent's suggestion is too ambitious compared to the other "level 1" tasks -- probably it would take most people at least a few dozen hours, and it takes some people much longer.