How computers are really going to ruin chess.

In 15-25 years time computer training software will completely take over chess to the point where no other method of trying to improve will compete. 

All the ingredients are there: 

#1. Huge amounts of reliable data almost instantly. Chess.com can easily create different "flavours" of training and play them off one another in a quasi-evolutionary process to find the best training.    

#2. Huge financial incentives to provide training that actually works. 

It will work out that almost every person will reach 1900-2000+, and anything above that will be directly related to how much time they spend using the software and their biological capacity for chess. 

I feel like a lot of the wonder will then be gone out of chess. The crazy plans and theories and arguments such as about de la Maza, the ideas and discussions about openings or games or chess books/articles - nobody will stop that discussion, but it will be a waste of time compared to the allocated chess software training. It'll become a little like knowing the secrets of a magic show while viewing it. The higher level creativity and improvisation will have gone out of chess, the "human" factor will have gone, and it won't be a game work playing any longer, because ironically the value of chess is in hitting a wall and trying to understand it.  

"Almost every person will reach 1900-2000+"  -  Since ratings are relative and not absolute, it could never happen.  

Cheer up, low rated player will always be with us.

/  I always have them cut my pizza into six slices, since I could never eat eight.

Dude, if they didn't ruin chess now, there's zero chance they'll ruin chess in the future. Today's engines are close to perfection in tactical exploitation, and even if they are still not perfect, they can easily crush a human player. So why people's ratings didn't soar up yet?

I think you will have bigger problems to worry about than chess engines. How about androids looking perfectly like humans, taking over the world (and most human tasks) AND playing chess like a beast? The horror.

BTW, the pace of development in this direction has been rapid.

Are any programmers heading in that direction? I haven't noticed it yet.

No, think carefully, it's even possible that everyone could become around the same rating. There is nothing to stop that from happening.    

Blade Runner was just a movie.

http://weburbanist.com/2014/06/30/almost-human-15-frighteningly-realistic-robots-androids/

In 15-25 years (as per the OP), things will be A LOT different than now.....

I wonder how good players such as Carlsen and Anand would be if computers were never invented? In this computer age, Fischer would be number 1 today in his prime.

Let's say robots are invented that perfectly emulate human beings. How is this inherently a bad thing?

It depends which human beings they perfectly emulate.

Humans are made redundant. What happens to all (or most of) the redundant humans in the world? Think carefully....

Very much so. This points out a potential flaw, but not one inherent to the concept.

Why do you assume it would be something bad?

That's a good point actually. 

There's also a "potential flaw" with the idea of giving nuclear weapons to ISIL or another crazy terrorist organization, "but not one inherent to the concept".  

To be honest with you, nothing like that is going to happen in the next 15-25 years or even in the next 200 years. All of that AI stuff is nonsense, will never happen. Throw it in with the "eliminating aging" fiction.  

Terrorist organizations have never left any doubt as to what they'd do with nuclear weapons--and it's inherent to their very nature. Robots with human-level AI have no such nature or precedent--just a lot of hype and fluff from people who like to get excited about things.

Ratings are relative. If everyone uses chess training software, then you can't have everyone getting to 1900-2000+. It just means that in 15-25 years the 1500-1600's will play as strong as the 1900-2000+ of today.  

It doesnt matter how sofisticated chess software gets.  The human mind will still only be able to retain a certain number of patterns.

Chess teaching will change. And people will be using the same openings with even more theory.

960 chess is probably the answer to the opening theory problem. Unless we want to see 90% of GM games be draws.

Chess engines can already beat the top humans with move and pawn odds, so ...