Chess will never be solved, here's why

Not objections, just red herring.

It's worse than that. He doesn't know what he's talking about and also totally dishonest, as an attempt to conceal that fact. I wasn't sure whether it was dishonesty or dementia. Now he miraculously has a search tree AND a proof tree. Haven't noticed him mention that before. Effectively, every position needs a search tree, which also doubles as a proof tree. However, many more processes are involved. Relevant positions have to be stored and compared with positions obtained where disparate chess lines converge. The storage itself becomes impossible. I think he's confusing "proof tree" with forward, analytical search, as is performed by search engines. That is because a "proof tree" is impossible until there is a sufficient body of stored results.

Basically he's trying to make it up as he goes along, as I am now, myself, except I may be a bit more convincing than he is, despite his undoubtedly vast experience in the field of computing, compared with my merely passing year one of a computing degree before switching to philosophy and having been a software writing home hobbyist in the distant past, in the mid 1980s. Anyhow, there's no doubt he is arguing dishonestly, without any intention at all of trying to discuss his ideas. His inventing new bits ad hoc proves that. He'll probably claim to have mentioned it 5000 posts ago, in another thread, in 1323. Therefore, you cannot win.

@4046
I thought you were objecting to the 10^14, but now I hear you did not object but just launched a red herring or green herring for a change. 

@4047

"It's worse" "He doesn't know" "dishonest" "conceal" "dishonesty" "dementia" "hasn't a clue" "confusing" "dishonestly"
Poor debating for the Facebook debating champion, just insults for lack of argument.

Facts, figures, logical argument please.

Just objecting to the way you think you can discuss things. Like you get to tell others what they have to think. Never listen to them. Can you wonder that it's hard to tell whether it's dementia or dishonesty?

I edited that post, so maybe it is clearar now, what the objection was.

Oh so you've come out of your shell and shown your true colours for the first time?

That's troll-talk you're using there. Things are becoming clearer.

No, I'm not going to use facts, figures and logical argument. Basically, because you don't. It's all invented, isn't it. Who are you trying to fool, though?>?

@4050
"Just objecting to the way you think you can discuss things." ++ Facts, figures, logic

"Like you get to tell others what they have to think."
++ Others can think what they want. If you believe in unicorns, martians, the Loch Ness monster or do not believe in the Big Bang, Quantum Mechanics, Relativity I could not care less.

"Never listen to them." ++ I listen or rather read, but have not seen any valid counterargument. Lost of insults. Once in a while a counterargument that is invalid and refuted.

"Can you wonder that it's hard to tell whether it's dementia or dishonesty?"
++ Please do not project your own problems on others.

A troll will always deceive and attempt to deceive, and when that is understood, will use that understanding as a basis to attack those who discover that they're trolling. A form of projection, trying to represent the other as what they are.

So that's what we have now and where are the little ++ gone to?

@4051
So you objected about storage. That was not an issue.
I am not concerned about storage only about effort.
"10^14 is a good ballpark estimate of the forward search effort." 

So you've now come out as a troll, as the sudden lack of ++ clearly demonstrates. Good.

@4054

More insults: "troll" "deceive".
Facts, figures, logic.
If you cannot produce any, better stay silent than project your own issues.

We'll probably never again see the ++ because then it might look as if you're worried about the sudden change. But now that I've written this, we might see them. Why have you been trolling all this time, though? It was clearly obvious that's what you were doing, because if what you were saying was honest, it would mean that all your chairs weren't at home. That would be the understatement of the century.

@4056

"the sudden lack of ++"
++ I use ++ to clearly discern where my own comment starts after the "quoted phrase" I respond to. If I do not quote any phrase I do not need any ++

It isn't an insult. It's an observation. You've been trolling all this time. I knew that but maybe some others didn't.

But you always quoted and always used them. Too late. Rattle the window enough and the parrots will fly out.

Now it's been established, I'm blocking you.

@4060
You project your own issues.
Read post @4043 with plenty of facts, figures, explanations and then comment factually on it if you can at all instead of obscuring it with meaningless insults and accusations.
As the Facebook debating champion you know that ad hominem is the lowest.

The laugh of the century. I would be a millionaire many times over if I wasn't concerned about storage. Just buy up all the stuff that's going to be worth big money, in 20 to 40 years. All of a sudden, storage doesn't matter. It becomes rather easy, when the actual prices are no-brainers and only storage is an issue.

When the person is obviously trolling and obviously using dishonest tactics, since when is it an ad hominem to point that out, when you NEVER respond honestly to a properly put-together argument?

No, it isn't ad hominem to do that but what you're trying to do now IS ad hominem, because it is always the refuge of the troll, to accuse others of what the troll is doing.