Einstein called chess a waste of time, what do you think?

A true waste of time is arguing on a chess forum about whether Einstein thought chess was a waste of time. 

All I know is that it's far, far harder to get reliable information on the subject than it was 15 years ago, at least from the internet. It's as though the entire discussion has been vetoed from somewhere or by something. Everyone seems to think it's a conspiracy and one could say that if there's a conspiracy, they may have caused it. I suppose it's possible to get some kind of info from the kind of sites that are quite rightly blocked as much as possible.

Well, my ex wife is Jewish and so's my daughter. I'm not going there.

I don’t think, my brain is so smooth.

einstein is rlly smart! hes right you can do better somthing othern but its fun! and i real life you are happy that you can play chess! and if you look so, than he's worng! ( pls award me )

Obviously he’s expressing he likes chess but that he’s certainly with more important needed things and turns to chess to relax, sounds.

I stopped engaging with Optimissed because he seems like an innocent soul and I don't wish to be rude to him. But he has that unfortunate tendency conspiracists/superstitious people do of thinking that believing something different to the "mainstream" on almost every issue makes them an elevated thinker. Speaking to people who will continually expand the sphere of the conspiracy rather than consider changing their mind is impossible. I learned this speaking to 9/11 Truthers about a decade ago and it's not an experience I would repeat.

Einstein is sort of famous...

I also watch random math and physics videos so I pick up general history here and there. I mentioned some math ones in a different topic. For an examples of physics, I've been liking Sabine Hossenfelder's videos lately.

Also random videos like this (I keep forgetting this channel exists until I find it again months later). These are all history.

We don't have the same amount of undiscovered beautify as back then. It's either chess or memes. But more likely both.

Not a good answer. All you're doing is claiming you know everything.

General knowledge is a class of knowledge that people don't even remember where they picked it up. For example I have no idea when I learned I live on the North American continent, or that George Washington was the first US president. These are just things people in the US know.

Einstein and his theory of relativity are so well known that they enter this category i.e. he's known even to those who have no interest in math or science. I guess fewer know his Nobel prize was for the photoelectric effect, and the whole story surrounding that... or that E=MC^2 isn't the full equation (or is, as long as the mass isn't moving).

So anyway, not only would your claims about his wife have the possibility of entering into the realm of general knowledge, I also have a 2nd way I could know, which is that I have knowledge about Einstein that is slightly (but not much) more in depth than general knowledge (such as the bits I mention above).

So there, I've answered your question "why should you know" and explained why it's not "you're claiming you know everything." You're lucky I type quickly or I may not have bothered.

I suspect the weasle word there is "reliable." No TRUE Scottsman would write an article or book about Einstein, and leave out the fact that his wife made major contributions to his theory.

😂👍

Of course, a good reason to argue why it would require me to know everything, is that this is obscure knowledge... which supports my point about the idea not getting any traction.

Look, I have no personal preference on this topic. If his wife was a genius that's fine... but like everything else I'm not going to believe it until I have a good reason... and a random person mentioning it online is not a good reason.

😂 llama… what’s your view on drones?

I have no idea

Uh, oh, probably the biggest thing is I wish they existed when I was a kid. I really wanted a remote controlled helicopter, but back in those days they were large and expensive (and probably dangerous for a kid to own). Now as an adult I don't care.

Umm, other than that... they allow normal people to make some cool videos such as overhead shots that normally wouldn't be possible for amateurs, and their use in the military is a bit concerning... although I suppose bombs and missiles are just as impersonal, and drones allow for more targeted killing.

There are some fun engineering applications, such as remote base stations to give people cell phone coverage e.g. in a war torn area like Ukraine, or immediatley after a natural disaster.

It's obscure due to the volume of hero-worship for E. Some believe she was the better mathematician, that's all. Others dispute that. There are also some personal things about him that others dislike. That's fairly indisputable but it isn't what we're discussing.

You were mentioning the other day that you find it difficult to relate to others on this website and you aren't necessarily happy here. I replied that you could be among friends if you wanted to be. I didn't mean that it's uncondittional; being a tough guy may impress some but referring to people as random doesn't really impress, coming as it does from a random person. It doesn't mean anything and you already made it clear that you don't do relationships with people.

Don't worry, I'm not coming for your title as most pompous man on chess.com. Telling others things like "I'm sure you'd beg for me to educate you, if you only had the character" or whatever it is you tell Elroch and Btickler at least once a week.

"I could be among friends if I wanted to" is good advice, however I take it a bit differently. It's a mistake for me to look for friends on this website. I could be among friends if I made the effort to look elsewhere.

(I want to mention there are a few people I like, and if you read this please don't take it as a slight )