I found your copy in a used book store. Your notes were flawed. I threw the book away.
Concise, encompassing, and directly to the point. Thank you Ziryab. 
In practice, however, chess cannot be solved because it’s beyond the capacity of any human mathematicians and beyond the capabilities of computers. There are 10120 potential variations of games in chess and around 10^43 different potential positions on the board. To fully solve chess, every single one of these must be compared against the other.
#1277
"around 10^43 different potential positions on the board.
To fully solve chess, every single one of these must be compared against the other."
++ To strongly solve chess each of the 10^44 legal positions needs to be considered.
To weakly solve chess only 10^17 legal, sensible, reachable, and relevant positions need to be considered.
Losing Chess has been weakly solved considering only 10^9 positions.
Checkers has been weakly solved considering 10^7 * 10^7 = 10^14 positions.
Ultra-weakly solved means that the game-theoretic value of the initial position has been determined
Weakly solved means that for the initial position a strategy has been determined to achieve the game-theoretic value against any opposition, and
strongly solved is being used for a game for which such a strategy has been determined for all legal positions.
Chess may never be solved for one simple reason, we have to make this super super calculator AI. If many chess program AIs are already stronger than humans, why buy a new program with a more powerful AI when the existing ones will already be more or less unbeatable for humans player at the maximum level ?
Maybe they are superior but not yet unbeatable for a human which means that there will still be others but when this is done there will be no point in making new ones and in the end the game will not be solved because there will not be a super, super calculator having calculated everything.
#1281
"we have to make this super super calculator" ++ As Sveshnikov said: modern computers with good assistants can weakly solve chess in 5 years. That is without new hardware or software.
"why buy a new program with a more powerful AI when the existing ones will already be more or less unbeatable for humans player at the maximum level ?"
++ Why buy a faster car when the existing cars already are much faster than humans.
There will always be stronger engines that make even less errors.
Thus chess is a forced win for black.
I proved this once and wrote it in the margins of my copy of “My System”, but I lost the book. But you get the idea.