None whatsoever (around here).

It will be solved computer wise eventually. Since no human can memorize the ridiculously massive move trees that a computer will have solved it will continue to be played.

But then again when you look at a lot of the top few GM games, how many of them end in draws already? The top tier human level of chess is already reaching areas where more and more draws happen. That is probably a bigger threat to the long term of chess then computers solving the game. If humans reach a level where the top tier player knowledge and calculation is so strong that almost every game is inevitably a draw, that would probably end it.

Then I guess everyone would switch to go until that same level is reached.

Why are you so hostile? Obviously I didn't know this -- my apologies! Would appreciate if you would point me to these games, sounds interessting. 

I'm not being hostile, I'm simply taking you at your word and asking the  logical follow-up question based on the premise of your claim.

Hi guys, I am currently working on a chess AI, from a machine learning background.  Here are some of my insights about chess being solved:

Chess has on the order of 10^120 possible games.  Thus, it is nearly impossible to store or search these games.  There are ~10^81 atoms in the known universe (obviously, if the universe is infinite, there are many more atoms in the universe than 10^120, but we know of around 10^81, and this is a guess, but is still many orders of magnitude away from the number of possible chess games).  A corollary of this is that if we mined the entire known universe to produce storage drives, we would not be able to store enough information to solve chess (or even get close).  

Most of the research in AI goes toward approximating correct behavior in real-time, so we can only hope to make computers better at chess than before, rather than trying to make computers completely solve chess.  Chess computers have surpassed grandmasters in power, but will never solve chess.

Still, there may be a weak solution available via quantum computing, but by no means would it mean anything to your everyday player.

This refers mostly to the size of the universe, starting with the Big Bang, until the present.  Since the Big Bang doesn't "expand into a space" around it, but instead constitutes all the known universe itself, it's boundary constitutes the de facto edge of the known universe, according to the Standard Model, Guth's Inflationary Hypothesis, and the usual caveats to the Copehagen Consensus in Quantum Mechanics.

Duh?  Or something like that.  @TheGrobe would know.

No way could all the possible chess games be stored in our "known universe."  Not enough storage space, for sure.

That's reason enough to go fishing, more often.  

Boy, I'm sure glad there was fishing at the end of that one (it was getting pretty tedious).

Chess surely won't be solved in our lifetime.  So BEE Happy.

Your games are spastic.  No disbelief intended.

I think I'm safe.  No one hits on Flying Pigs.

Go Bi.  And you double your chances for getting dates.

Exception for @BobbyDK.  He's a brother from another planet.

@BobbyDK storage is one issue. Time is another.

Let's presume you have an increadible, but still achievable number, of 100 million computers working on evaluating those positions, and they are chomping on 1,000,000 positions a second each. That's 100,000,000,000,000 positions a second being evaluated.

That means you will need 10^107 seconds to "solve" chess.

There are  6.108*10^9 seconds in a century. So in just a bit less than 10^100 centuries time, we'll have "solved" chess . . . once we fire up those 100 million computers . . .

I think I liked you better with your snorkle avatar.

Ok, I'll put another scuba shot up ;)

It was a good movie.  You were (only) slightly off topic, methinks.

No other meaning was implied, or intended.

But you do say some "scary things," if you haven't already noticed.

ECHECS06 CAN I GO ALONG WITH YOU=IWILL BAIT YOUR HOOK

I was wondering if you where here."
"I was watching from down there."
"Why didn't you come and watch with me here?"
"I knew how you must be feeling. I guessed you'd rather be alone."
"It's the devil; isn't it ?"
"Yes, 'its rather."
"It's most disappointing. I shall have to go all out on some modifications.
I wonder if I could ask you to do something ?"
"Of course. Anything I can."
Well, you see. It isn't only the structure of the bomb.
It's the trouble. It's in the bopping of it
We must lessen the force of the impact.
I asked you originally if you could fly in over water,
and drop the bomb at 150 feet."