For everyboday who doesn´t know: ornicar - a lichess developer- implemented a so called " neural cheating detection" in the server some days ago what means that the system recs not only the parameter of suspicious moves which are guessed by the developers, it runs his analyze during you play, if i understood it correctly. So this could be very worthfull i case of tournament cheating.
#8 I agree on all points.
#38 I agree on all points.
I and others have pointed out that introducing this barrier to entry for tournaments would simply cause cheaters to move from tournaments into the seek lobby, perhaps killing the lobby and ensuring that no new players will ever be able to play again.
In the IRC channel I have suggested and now in the forums I am suggesting that weekly, monthly, and marathon events should be monitored in order to do damage control. In the IRC channel I have suggested and now in the forums I am suggesting that in these events that even if human moderation is not possible that some kind of automated moderation such as cheat detection for players who have won 10+ games in a row (or some metric about unexpected results; perhaps a player who has upset 10+ opponents) be implemented.
It's atrocious when after the first hour of an event there is a flagrant cheater and accusations are flooding the tournament chat and multiple streamers are live, possibly even themselves victims of that cheater! Suggestions such as #1 are heavy-handed but as lichess grows it becomes necessary to do something to address flagrant, highly visible instances of cheating.
#38 I agree on all points.
I and others have pointed out that introducing this barrier to entry for tournaments would simply cause cheaters to move from tournaments into the seek lobby, perhaps killing the lobby and ensuring that no new players will ever be able to play again.
In the IRC channel I have suggested and now in the forums I am suggesting that weekly, monthly, and marathon events should be monitored in order to do damage control. In the IRC channel I have suggested and now in the forums I am suggesting that in these events that even if human moderation is not possible that some kind of automated moderation such as cheat detection for players who have won 10+ games in a row (or some metric about unexpected results; perhaps a player who has upset 10+ opponents) be implemented.
It's atrocious when after the first hour of an event there is a flagrant cheater and accusations are flooding the tournament chat and multiple streamers are live, possibly even themselves victims of that cheater! Suggestions such as #1 are heavy-handed but as lichess grows it becomes necessary to do something to address flagrant, highly visible instances of cheating.
i dont really think it would cause too much of a difference tbh... ppl can cheat at any point... there could be ppl playing normally for a while so they wouldnt be suspected and then they could start cheating... :/
im not saying that any of the ideas here r bad or anything... im just saying that its not necessarily only the newbies who cheat... :)
im not saying that any of the ideas here r bad or anything... im just saying that its not necessarily only the newbies who cheat... :)
well i was watching the stream yesterday(kc stream) and yes i thought it was an engine.. especially when kc nearly got checkmated with two nights .. so i strongly agree with the fact that newbies should complete some noms before entering major tournaments
A threshold of 'games played' won't work, of course, because anybody silly enough to want to cheat on an online chess server will find a way around the threshold :)
Real time detection is the only solution.
Of course this might flag some 'new to Lichess' 2400+ player on the site as a bot :)
I'm sure the admins can handle the flagged 2400+'s on a case by case basis, as the pool of 2400+ players is quite limited :)
Real time detection is the only solution.
Of course this might flag some 'new to Lichess' 2400+ player on the site as a bot :)
I'm sure the admins can handle the flagged 2400+'s on a case by case basis, as the pool of 2400+ players is quite limited :)
The fact that there's no money involved doesn't matter - we invest time and effort into playing, and having a cheater ruin a tournament experience is significant, especially if it happens regularly.
Also, it doesn't have to be bullet proof to be a good measure; there's always a way to cheat, we know that. But if it makes it harder and requires more effort, it will discourage such actions.
Also, it doesn't have to be bullet proof to be a good measure; there's always a way to cheat, we know that. But if it makes it harder and requires more effort, it will discourage such actions.
I looked at the profiles of the top 75 players in the tournament http://en.lichess.org/tournament/iIir026n that was quoted by KC, and, unusually, not a single one is listed as an engine user... so I can't see what the gripe is about.
One does notice a couple of interesting things:
1) These KC threads tend to crop up when his rating is waning a bit - so perhaps it is more a reaction to a few losses
2) The KC votes are (as ever) statistical nonsense, as they are artificially boosted by being broadcast on his stream. The sample is skewed because the viewers are all effectively prepped to agree with him.
A minimum number of games played before a player may enter a tournament won't get rid of cheaters in any case. It will simply move them - in bulk - from one place to another.
I would also remind KC and others that lichess.org works very hard - and rather successfully - to track cheats. The best thing everyone can do is to report them with relevant links. A BAD thing to do is to make accusations, either in threads or on broadcasts, about individuals.
One does notice a couple of interesting things:
1) These KC threads tend to crop up when his rating is waning a bit - so perhaps it is more a reaction to a few losses
2) The KC votes are (as ever) statistical nonsense, as they are artificially boosted by being broadcast on his stream. The sample is skewed because the viewers are all effectively prepped to agree with him.
A minimum number of games played before a player may enter a tournament won't get rid of cheaters in any case. It will simply move them - in bulk - from one place to another.
I would also remind KC and others that lichess.org works very hard - and rather successfully - to track cheats. The best thing everyone can do is to report them with relevant links. A BAD thing to do is to make accusations, either in threads or on broadcasts, about individuals.
Hmm. you had a right go at me before as well in this thread:
http://en.lichess.org/forum/game-analysis/analysing-my-games-against-kingscrusher?page=5
Interesting. The tournament link I gave shows the winner still as the engine abuser btw - who also came 2nd in the Daily Bullet yesterday.
http://en.lichess.org/forum/game-analysis/analysing-my-games-against-kingscrusher?page=5
Interesting. The tournament link I gave shows the winner still as the engine abuser btw - who also came 2nd in the Daily Bullet yesterday.
I say it is I see it, KC. You're a good player, but there seems to be little logic to the ideas that start popping out when you've lost a few.
Why is it relevant that I've disagreed with you before in another thread? Or haven't I played enough games to be allowed to do so yet? :D
I seem to remember that YOU were the one who was 'having a right go' and being ridiculously rude when Dr-Zaitsev analysed some of his wins against you. I would have thought you'd prefer to forget that thread ever happened...
The tournament link you gave that I looked at was: lichess.org/tournament/iIir026n
At the time of writing YOU were the winner and none of the top 75 are labelled as cheats.
I stand by what I said regarding your data collation - it is so flawed as to be irrelevant. If you wish to use people's opinions, you have to collect it openly and fairly, with both sides of the argument stated. Perhaps on a lichess forum rather than your own broadcast.
Why is it relevant that I've disagreed with you before in another thread? Or haven't I played enough games to be allowed to do so yet? :D
I seem to remember that YOU were the one who was 'having a right go' and being ridiculously rude when Dr-Zaitsev analysed some of his wins against you. I would have thought you'd prefer to forget that thread ever happened...
The tournament link you gave that I looked at was: lichess.org/tournament/iIir026n
At the time of writing YOU were the winner and none of the top 75 are labelled as cheats.
I stand by what I said regarding your data collation - it is so flawed as to be irrelevant. If you wish to use people's opinions, you have to collect it openly and fairly, with both sides of the argument stated. Perhaps on a lichess forum rather than your own broadcast.
#59: I really wish you stay out of my threads from now on. Go and support engine abusers because you are a troll.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.