Hacker News Reader

Comment by kelsey9876543 | Hacker News Reader

They are moot because the solution is known. When a human makes a mistake the intrigue is discovering the fix to become better. In solo copetition solved games are highly fascinating because the person is racing the TAS or the solved route. In human versus human games, we can simply look up what the human did wrong. There is no cognitive challenge in answer lookup. Its just oh, he sucks he missed the move. Since its two humans competing it becomes "who sucks less" but its two losers that both suck competing. Thats the problem with competitive play of solved games, it must be solo competition against the solution.

View on HN

> Since its two humans competing it becomes "who sucks less" but its two losers that both suck competing.

Yeah, this is my problem with bowling and golf. If you're a professional bowler, literally your only job is to knock down the pins. Why do anything else? If you miss one, you're bad at your job. Ditto with golf -- the hole is right there, just get the ball in it!

(Honestly not sure how sarcastic vs sincere I am in this comment.)

Foot races are also solved - these losers should just get a car!

Cars are not allowed in the rules of the game "foot race", therefore your solution is not valid and therefore your argument has no evidence to support your claim.

You used this word, evidence. I don't think it means what you think it means.

Parent made an argument by analogy, no evidence needs to enter the picture. At best you can say his analogy is flawed.

It's not even flawed, anyway. If cars not being allowed is supposed to refute the analogy, then an obvious answer would be that Othello playing programs could also banned in Othello competitions (given that the solution can't just be internalized by a human player).

...is this satire?

In bowling and golf the mistake is athletic. You moved your body wrong, also there are variables such as the wind and humidity of the air in golf, and a in bowling the ball and other micro variables effect play. It's possible to improve physical condition with training, but there is no "perfect". In a fully abstracted competitive game where all variables are eliminated except for mental choices, it becomes about memorization of the solutions if the game is solved.

>In human versus human games, we can simply look up what the human did wrong. There is no cognitive challenge in answer lookup. Its just oh, he sucks he missed the move. Since its two humans competing it becomes "who sucks less" but its two losers that both suck competing. Thats the problem with competitive play of solved games, it must be solo competition against the solution.

I don't think you understand the purpose of games.

This is like saying since we have cars, why do people still race?

Or "why even do shooting competitions, when a robot or a person with a laser scope can easily win them?"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com