Search "user:DailyInsanity"

@RoySturgess said in #33: > Dear forum viewers, please don't mind Roy, he is still mourning the shutdown of the Oz chess forums...

@sjcjoosten said in #25: Thank you for your comment! You raise an interesting point by considering an 'extreme' position. It's indeed a good idea to try and limit test such premises to see if they sti…

@Toscani said in #23: > Thank you for your comment, but I'm not sure that LLM summary of my article is very accurate :) It seems that the second part of your response outlines a method for selecting a…

@jdannan said in #21: > I agree with the fundamental premise but think it maybe misses the point. A set of principles cannot tell us whether a4 is better than b4 in that position, but they do help rem…

@dboing said in #20: > Exactly.. So glad this crowd of thinkers can uncover things that could have been long ago. If we lifted our heads sooner. That sure is an interesting way of putting it :) Howeve…

@NochEinSpieler said in #14: Thank you for your detailed comment. I have read through your response a couple of times but am still confused by certain parts, so feel free to correct any misinterpretat…

@MrMatt96 said in #10: > This series has been articulating a lot of things I've never been able to verbalize very well, but which have been rattling around my brain for a long time. Eagerly awaiting t…

@IntentionalBlunder said in #6: > Thank you for your detailed comment! While I understand why you might see value in principles, I don't believe that a back-and-forth reasoning game can support that c…

@Toadofsky said in #4: > Chess engines have a branching factor of about 6, which suggests that humans can likewise calculate relevant variations to some extent. > > In crazyhouse and shogi, due to bei…

@Fokus98 said in #2: > I've read all four of your posts in this series and liked them so far. While I found that thinking about the decision making process the way you did is helpful, I also believe y…