chess openings are cheating.

even though it is good in sense that it tells players immediately what they are playing, what's not good is that it is  extremely advanced and not just reveals generic openings but also the counter defense and gambits and that actually helps a tad unfairly bit to players who will google search these openings lines mid game.

just by mentioning something is gambit it takes away true immersion and is technically unfair cautionary advice.

what im saying is genuinely possible form of cheating that will probably go undetected. i think itd be fair to ask to consider this issue or some kind of solution.

git gud.

i agree with you.
poscriptum, the opening is okay but the gambit and countergambit should be censored til the end of the game.

#3 not the opening explorer but the fact that on the website, in every game it shows the opening name

i didn't understood how naming of chess notation give unfair advantage...

it just does ok

That's not cheating.

Finally someone said it! I also think that using tactics is cheating

bruh.

sometime i heard that showing rating of your opponent is cheating because high rating can dismoralize you, but man that's the most ridiculous claim i've ever heard

What's next? Should we abolish the notation, since it can be used to find the opening? Should we disable Google? Shall we burn chess books?

OP is right. (even if "cheating" is perhaps not the most appropriate term to describe it).

Chess.com informing your opponent the strange sacrifice you played in the opening is a known gambit (or not...) , do violate the idea of fair play: a player shall receive no external help, even if just an information, during a game of chess.

FIDE Laws of chess

https://handbook.fide.com/chapter/e012023

[...]

11.3.1 During play the players are forbidden to use any notes, sources of information or advice, or analyse any game on another chessboard.

[...]

12.7 If someone observes an irregularity, he/she may inform only the arbiter. Players in other games must not to speak about or otherwise interfere in a game. Spectators are not allowed to interfere in a game. The arbiter may expel offenders from the playing venue.

[...]

Daily is a game mode reserved for online chess. FIDE doesn't really control that, does it? I mean, I don't know.

Daily is sure similar to Correspondence Chess ruled by the ICCF and where it's not possible at all to control what people do in their homes. Hence one is allowed to access databases, books and magazines as well one is allowed to move the pieces on the board in order to try find the best move...

I'm pretty sure this thread is meant for Live chess, not Daily.

It's similar. But I think chess.com (and maybe other websites idk) just has their own game mode, which includes opening help. And anyway, it's only for like the first two-four moves, after that you get nothing. It's not like using an engine, it's just checking the records and giving game result percentages.

What is similar to what?

Because if you mean by that, Daily chess is similar to Live chess, well, yes of course, it's both about chess. But similar doesn't mean identical. And not identical means, well, different.

And one huge difference, is the right to acess external documentation during the game.

Remove that difference "cos it's similar" and of course, nothing makes sense and there is no point discussing anything at all.

o..k then

All I'm saying I disagree with OP tho

For a moment, I'd even be willing to agree with you. However, if this does provide an advantage, it's so microscopic that it can't even be called an advantage:

1. There is no notation for traps, so you can go in that with or without naming

2. Even if you know the name and how to "play it", if you don't know the ideas of moves, it can give more harm than good.

3. On your rating theory just don't work, because players just don't know it and "move as feel it".

4. There are many self-maded openings on that level without clear name, so it can "help" only rarely.

5. Try only into gimmicks and not into thinking is a good way to stuck.
P.s. I'll be waiting for a topic "ban [name] opening, it's auto win".

Sorry to say so, but you have it all wrong @Sewer009.

There is nothing such as a "microscopic" advantage when it comes to external influences upon the game or the players, that may change the outcome of a game.

You need to remember, we are not talking about café games, nor games in the park by a sunny day. What defines the rules of chess, is what happened during prized games, with LOTS of money on the table.

Can you figure out the scandal that occured when a player, in the middle of a prized Top chess players tournament in the early 20th Century (GM title existed not back then), won his game by promoting a pawn into a piece of his opponent's colour and delivering checkmate by it?

I think this happened twice before the FIDE amended the rules of chess, by specifying one must promote a pawn into a piece of own colour.

The problem is not to know if a thing will happen often or not, simply, nobody wants to see their opponent granted any unfair advantage when playing a rated or prized game of chess.

acknowledging some points above, i have to say prized or not prized tournament, either way i don't think it should reveal gambits and countergambits until the end of the game or if the game is analysed.
imo, you should look at it from casual point of view not from point of view of some kind of game masters because they're not most people who visit or play chess online. 
so, yeah i wont re repeat itd be silly, just wanted to mention how i feel about the thing, myself.