Chess will never be solved, here's why

It's making an assumption to generalize a specific rate, but even I grant it's consistently 100 a day - we're then talking about almost 4.5 months of continuous daily posting in this thread - typing out detailed rebuttals, which often takes a significant amount of time. And that's just on this topic... That is a giant waste of time. 
Great defense - you sure got me. People in this thread didn't waste 2.5 years debating, just 4.5 months of continuous debating spread out over the course of 2.5 years! Oh man you really got me.

To waste months of your life debating a topic like this, to make 13180 posts on it, is crackpot behavior.

I find it completely predictable that you would claim other activities such as carpentry, meeting your wife, working on chess, etc. are indistinguishable from debating some pointless topic on the internet. It's predictable because it justifies your behavior, and that's just exactly what I can count on you doing. That's how you got to this point. I wouldn't expect someone with the ability to introspect to wind up debating for 4.5 months continuously a completely useless topic like this. But in reality... all the activities I mentioned actually have some intrinsic value, whereas squabbling over the internet with randos to prop up your broken ego... doesn't have much intrinsic value. No, I'm afraid it doesn't.

Of course you wouldn't point it out to people, because you don't want anyone pointing it out to you, do you?

It's not in the same manner, due to the scale and nature - for starters, if you were to heed my advice it would actually be healthy for you, whereas your debate topic is just some completely meaningless squabble over tablebases that has gone on for 4.5 months. Secondly I have no intention of spending the next 4.5 months here with you addressing every one of your predictable, lame excuses for why you're justified by wasting 4.5 months of your life in an online circle jerk. That's the key difference.

Assuming people don't realize they could have spent that time doing something else is pretty pretentious. Even people who do all manner of productive things need some down time. Pointing out certain things @tygxc says are wrong is very low hanging fruit, which is to say it can be done recreationally with little effort or thought. Assuming otherwise is also pretentious. Not reading much of the topic to know this is also pretentious.

I've attacked this topic, but on the basis that it goes in circles.

Anyway, the person's critique is is not very interesting. It's only superficially true at best, and generally whiny.

Well since I commented in this thread, and now get notified every time a post is added... which was a mistake. I want to just encourage those still debating this topic to... do some meditation tonight, light a scented candle, and contemplate the universe, the trees outside, and also why you are wasting your life arguing with these people. Think also about how much you could have done had you not involved yourself in this thread ever. Of all the experiences you could have had... and could still have. Your life is in front of you. For example... for those of you who are single - it is entirely possible you could have met your wife had you not commented in this thread. Or you could have mastered 2-3 new openings by now. Or invented something - maybe invented an entirely new way of deriving tablebases... you could have taught yourself woodworking and built a gazebo for your yard, you could have bought a puppy and raised it into adulthood by now. Many things are possible and still remain possible. There is an infinite, untapped ocean of possibilities before you.

What is this, an optimissed alt? lol

It's making an assumption to generalize a specific rate, but let's just grant it's consistently 100 a day - we're then talking about almost 4.5 months of continuous daily posting in this thread - typing out detailed rebuttals, which often takes a significant amount of time. And that's just on this topic... That is a giant waste of time. 
Great defense - you sure got me. People in this thread didn't waste 2.5 years debating, just 4.5 months of continuous debating spread out over the course of 2.5 years! Oh man you really got me.

I should point out here that your assumption about daily volume over 2.5 years is now being compounded with an assumption about how many people have commented here in 2.5 years.

To waste months of your life debating a topic like this, to make 13180 posts on it, is crackpot behavior.

I haven't made 13,000+ posts here, and neither has anyone else. So then, you have graduating from passing judgment on a few of us to every single person that has commented?

I find it completely predictable that you would claim other activities such as carpentry, meeting your wife, working on chess, etc. are indistinguishable from debating some pointless topic on the internet.

I made no such claim. Be more perceptive, and more precise, thanks. I said that some of the activities you listed are a waste of time, which as it turns out is because I have either already accomplished them, or because I have evaluated them or participated in them before and found them lacking and so not worth pursuing. Building a gazebo? This is the bar for you? It's some 4x4s and some trelliswork from Home Depot.

It's predictable because it justifies your behavior, and that's just exactly what I can count on you doing. That's how you got to this point. I wouldn't expect someone with the ability to introspect to wind up debating for 4.5 months continuously a completely useless topic like this. But in reality... all the activities I mentioned actually have some intrinsic value, whereas squabbling over the internet with randos to prop up your broken ego... doesn't have much intrinsic value. No, I'm afraid it doesn't.

And what point is that, exactly? You have no basis for any claims about what point anyone has reached in their lives, or what people are propping up for not. This is the knee jerk response (emphasis upon the the latter) of someone who tried to toss out some unsolicited and insulting "advice" for others while purportedly exiting the thread, and who then caught got with foot still in the door and is now feeling sheepish for being petty.

Of course you wouldn't point it out to people, because you don't want anyone pointing it out to you, do you?

That conclusion doesn't follow, sorry. That's a narrative in your head...the ubiquitous "anyone that I don't like must be living in their parent's basement living on welfare and subsisting on Cheetos" narrative that insecure people often latch onto as their go-to coping mechanism.

It's not in the same manner, due to the scale and nature - for starters, if you were to heed my advice it would actually be healthy for you, whereas your debate topic is just some completely meaningless squabble over tablebases that has gone on for 4.5 months. Secondly I have no intention of spending the next 4.5 months here with you addressing every one of your predictable, lame excuses for why you're justified by wasting 4.5 months of your life in an online circle jerk. That's the key difference.

You have no idea what would be healthy for me or anyone else here.

I should point out here that your assumption about daily volume over 2.5 years is now being compounded with an assumption about how many people have commented here in 2.5 years.

I haven't made 13,000+ posts here, and neither has anyone else. So then, you have graduating from passing judgment on a few of us to every single person that has commented?

As for people's lives...I consider several of the activities you mentioned previously to be a waste of time at this point...I find it completely predictable that you would claim other activities such as carpentry, meeting your wife, working on chess, etc. are indistinguishable from debating some pointless topic on the internet.I made no such claim. Be more perceptive, and more precise, thanks. I said that some of the activities you listed are a waste of time, which as it turns out is because I have either already accomplished them, or because I have evaluated them or participated in them before and found them lacking and so not worth pursuing. Building a gazebo? This is the bar for you? It's some 4x4s and some trelliswork from Home Depot.

And what point is that, exactly? You have no basis for any claims about what point anyone has reached in their lives, or what people are propping up for not.

This is the knee jerk response (emphasis upon the the latter) of someone who tried to toss out some unsolicited and insulting "advice" for others while purportedly exiting the thread, and who then caught got with foot still in the door and is now feeling sheepish for being petty.

That conclusion doesn't follow, sorry. That's a narrative in your head...

the ubiquitous "anyone that I don't like must be living in their parent's basement living on welfare and subsisting on Cheetos" narrative that insecure people often latch onto as their go-to coping mechanism.

What is this, an optimissed alt? lol

i think its a bit conspiratorial to assume that ibrust is opt. in fact, i would say that opti would be rubbing off on yall if you seriously consider that.

plus the type of errors that opti makes are different than the errors that ibrust makes.

actually on second look they are actually very similar errors. ibrust's arguments are very much based on personal assumptions, like opti's.

'assume' would be a mistake.
But remark on the intense similiarities ... not a mistake.
Note how ibrust so vehemently claimed the forum's a waste of time and criticizes people who would spend time here - but then himself continues to persist in being here including posting long ranting posts instead of leaving.
In other words the projection of 'O'.

You should actually be thanking me for fighting so strongly for the wellbeing of your loser dunce behind. And if you didn't resent your daddy deeply you would be thanking me.

"Loser dunce"? "Daddy"? So, you're a teenage kid who doesn't have permission to use adult vocabulary yet. Not surprising, I guess.

I do, actually. Because as humans we have a common human nature, and it is just fundamentally not healthy for humans to debate online about how tablebases are formed for 4.5 months continuously. We know that. It's also deeply unhealthy to be unable to cope with people pointing out when you're engaging in unhealthy behavior. It'd be healthy for you to stop arguing with me / babbling off rationalizations, and just accept all of this. Dr. Phil would be proud if you could do that.

Dr. Phil is incompetent. We've already established that you have no basis for telling anyone what is healthy for them, since you could not reply to that point cogently. Babbling is a projection on your part. Go ahead and break down some examples of my babbling though, if you think you can demonstrate anything conclusively.

Not really because I can see the same people debating on page 1, on page 100, on page 300, and still here at page almost 600. You're correct I didn't look at all the individual pages. Good job, aren't you an impressive pseudo-intellectual, you have pointed out that I have not looked at every single page of this pointless debate, wow you are smart aren't you, and you even wrapped this point up in nice big debate words, man I can't even keep up with you.

You're trying too hard. Learn to recognize when you are overextending enough to look worse than your opponent.

Well actually... there is a plural form of "you" and since you're presuming to defend this entire activity on principle, you are appointing yourself to broadly represent everyone here. Anyway, you have a real talent for completely ignoring the meaning of things, and squabbling over just the little semantic details, don't you? Maybe you have some autism. You should go to a psychologist and see if they can diagnose you. It could help you become less crippled.

When you immediately rely on this type of stuff because you have no actual points to make, it shows people that you have nothing right away. You'll learn this over time.

What seems more important ... squabbling over this semantic nonsense, or addressing the issue that you / others have sat on your a$$es for 4.5 months continuously debating how tablebases are formed, and are still continuing to?

The discussion is not about how tablebases are formed, that's a temporary sideline at best, and one I have not weighed in on, by the way. This shows that you haven't even understood what you are reading here...or that you are willing to misrepresent things to try to save face...one of the two. Which is it?

For you the nonsense matters because you have to prop up your weak, fragile ego. That's how you try to do it... it's why you participate in these debates, why you can't turn away from them after 13000+ posts... and it's also why, when I point this out, it's such a sensitive spot for you, and it makes you so pissed off doesn't it?

Yes, I really seem like the pissed off one here. Try reading my posts in an even tone, without the internal narrator of your personal blog adding some imagined angst, etc. 

You did make that claim, actually. Notice the "etc." at the end of the sentence you quoted - the abbreviation for et cetera which means "and other similar things" - i.e. and other similar activities listed. No, I'm afraid you completely fail.

You argue like a kid, too. Everyone here knows what et cetera means. You wouldn't know what fails or not, though, so unilaterally declaring it is meaningless.

Infact, here you denied making the argument then you turned around and repeated the very argument... are you not clearly denying that the various activities I listed are worth pursuing? I didn't list that many activities, only like 4... impressive double talk my schizoid, internet dwelling friend!

Demonstrate, then. Your paraphrasing and strawmanning are not cutting it; you're far too imprecise.

Of course I do - your own prolonged participation in this thread, combined with your own statements and attitudes. Your behavior makes it very clear what kind of lifestyle you live, and that there's a problem that needs fixing. That's just the truth, I'm sorry it hurts but I didn't put you in this position, you did. I'm just pointing out the reality. Infact I'm hoping you will take it to heart and turn the ship in another direction. Don't shoot the messenger, little man.

Again, you're living in your own narrative. I'm not hurt at all, and you are just revealing what insecurities drive you. You were leaving. remember? Walking out the door with a little invective casually tossed back over your shoulder on the way out...that's the picture you wanted to paint, right? Now, you've turned back around and are arguing about living in basements and Pringles vs. Cheetos like a 14 year old who hasn't been on a date yet. Talking about how it must pain me, and becoming more strident about it with each post, and still not leaving. You set yourself up to fail here, it wasn't me. I'm just giving you more rope to do the job yourself.

The person feeling sheepish here is you when I point out you have been dwelling in this thread for 4.5 months debating how tablebases are formed. 
4.5 months of continuous debating is a long, long time. What would you have done if I hadn't mentioned it? Just kept going? 
I wonder how long you would go if just left uninterrupted... just kept going like the energizer bunny. 
Maybe I'll come back in a few years and see if this is still going on. I'll put it on my calendar 2 years from now.

Sure, come on back and make yourself look bad all over again. Happy to oblige.

Well the statement here is more based on observation of your behavior and attitudes than some formal logical deduction. However, loosely the way a person treats others is a reflection of how they want to be treated, so there is some logic underlying it. You're correct this hasn't been logically formalized, though. I'm glad you figured out the difference between your debate class and real life.

Again, this is how a kid argues. I took debate in 1981, and I have lived "real life" already...so this type of posturing from you is laughable, but also meaningless. If I told you Finding Nemo probably made you cry when you saw it, would that make you scream and stomp your feet? No? Then why would talking about some high school class bother an adult? You're just digging yourself deeper here. 

You're trying very hard to appear intelligent but it doesn't work when your argument has no substance,

Mirror time.

it is just plain to see you do not want me questioning your behavior. Like all we have to do is just observe your reaction here. Keep trying.

You have it backwards. You were the one looking for a reaction while you were "leaving" (with no intention of actually leaving). 

Well you had to be eating something the entire time. What were you eating? Not Cheetos, so what then...? Pringles? I hope you're not starving in your basement so preoccupied with debating chess tablebases that you can't even be torn away long enough to eat, just wasting away. Maybe your mom is bringing a trash can downstairs for you to take a dump in... I hope so.

There's a giant, gaping chasm between your behavior and the identity you aim to put forward. It is as wide as the grand canyon!

ibrust does sound a lot like optimissed.
Especially the projection behaviour.
But the ibrust account goes back to 2014. September of that year.
I've never seen it before though.
the Optimissed account started February of 2014.
'O' doesn't even log in for four days - and all of a sudden 'ibrust' is active?

The logic here doesn't work, I would need to be debating in this thread for 4.5 months continuously to actually rival what I'm railing against. So no, it's not comparable. 
If I am here still debating this with all of you even a few days from now... okay it's getting bad. A week from now... very dubious. A month from now... then someone needs to slap me, and probably take the computer from me. 2.5 years from now... then pleeeeease shoot me.

@13198

"Games aren't useful for solving chess, positions are" ++ Yes

"but even positions is a very large number, so yeah, it's too big" ++ For strongly solving by present technology 10^44 is to big, but 10^17 positions relevant to weakly solving is manageable. The 17 players in the present ICCF WC Finals considered 10^17 positions. They considered too many black moves and too few white moves, so their 112 drawn games are at least part of the weak solution of chess: redundant and thus fail safe, but not yet complete.