GenChess
labs.google
labs.google
Imagine putting all your work into creating an amazing demo and then drowning it with one design decision.
Edit: Ok I see that you can change the view in settings. They should make that option more visible.
Responsive design fail?
I can't find it on Chrome on MacOS, either..
EDIT: it shows up for me, once you actually start playing.
I'm pretty sure they're doing 2D image generation. Just look at the way it outlines some of the pieces.
That "outline" is just an artifact of less-than-perfect removal. Here's another one: https://imgur.com/a/zTQubPb
I was basically playing blindfolded chess
Sorry, but I'm a big fan of that "bullshit". And the big American companies are not, and they are making sure you know it, by pulling things like this.
1. its Googles decision to not allow this demo globally. Its a Chess Demo, what EU legal issue do you think makes this a problem? Probably NON...
And yes we are not America. Our privacy is getting better protected then that of americans. Move if you don't like it or at least take the time and effort to state clearly what you don't like about certain EU regulations.
Here, I am honestly not sure which part they rely on, to say that what they made might be unlawful.
The closest thing I found for Meta was that “emotion recognition systems” are classified as high-risk (paragraph 54), and high-risk systems must have their training data disclosed (Art 11(1))[0]. In theory, you could upload photos to meta.ai and ask it what emotions are displayed, but it is already a stretch. For GenChess, I’m at a loss; it doesn’t sound like you can do that. (Not that it prevented any vision chatbot from releasing.)
If someone has a better guess as to why they might have restrained it here, I am curious.
[0]: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A...
Nothing in the law requires a banner. It could even be handled in the browser by letting people choose what third-party cookies to accept (or none, hence the problem) and having that be negotiated during page load.
It's nice the law is being interpreted to require to be as easy to reject all local storage of other's data as it is to accept all local storage of other's data.
Much, much wiser to assume "there be dragons" and only engage once qualified legal counsel has helped you understand what compliance means to you.
And along these lines... The second least wise thing to do in this scenario is listen to randos in a forum like this tell you, "but all you have to do to comply is..."
To devise such a way to comply, they definitely need a large and expensive legal department.
The privacy abusers are much like trolls on the internet who, upon seeing a code of conduct (previously known as "rules") consisting of only "don't be a dick", will spawn endless arguments about what a "dick" is and how it is or is not inappropriate word, what does it really mean to be one, or, indeed, to be, question the use of the indefinite article, and complain about "don't" being too assertive and arrogant.
There are non-malicious explanations for the same pattern of behavior at large organizations - the motivation (malice or not-malice) that seems correct is a Rorschach test.
If I accidentally log IP addresses for EU users that opted out on some throw-away experimental page on my site, Brussels would never find out. If Google does it, it not only has to report the incident, but will most likely be fined. In order to avoid this outcome, they have internal review processes which makes ot "complicated and insurmountable", because how do you justify investing many hours of dozens of lawyers and technical reviewers time for a frivolous, niche AI demo?
If opting out is a possibility, then it's not essential data. If it's not essential data, what legitimate reason would you have to collect it in the first place?
Accidentally logging data that's essential but was supposed to be ephemeral would turn it "not-ephemeral" and make it possible to cross-reference with other information in privacy-defeating ways. As I said, it was a privacy-focused product, and using data that is meant for one thing (e.g. abuse detection and prevention) for some other out-of-spec use - even accidentally - is a big no-no.
Those that have to follow those laws need to care about the mess.
Doesn't the EU also have an 'AI Act' that imposes additional rules, even when you're not tracking anyone?
And a lot of employers have legal teams who are extremely risk-averse, so even if it's obvious to you and me that rules about "deepfakes" don't apply to a tool for generating pictures of chess pieces made of cheese, doesn't mean legal will sign it off.
Sadly, GDPR is not a black-and-white (pun intended with the chess project) checklist with black-and-white checklist items.
(I am a Googler, but not on this team, or familiar with their launch policies)
The many rules of the EU stifle speed and change the math for releasing something especially in a big company that has a variety of requirements built up over time to reduce litigation risk or being on the wrong side of one of the overreaching government officials there.
The process should be the reverse of that. Don't collect data unless you have been through the process of checking that it has a legal basis.
I bet the people at Peloton thought that too until they made that treadmill[1]. I know you meant your critique to be absurd, but it turns out creating a child eating machine by accident is entirely possible. I also bet Peloton product development now includes a process to review child-eatingness despite that not being their primary market, just the usual twice burnt reflex.
Accidentally logging the PII can easily happen for a single engineer. I managed to do it on an product that was privacy-focused & the error slipped through review. The odds of such inadvertent errors rise linearly with the number of products and engineers, and the fines are probably superlinear with the size of an offending organization. If your 3-person consultancy chomps on a GDPR baby or 2, no one will ever know about it, but if Google does it, it's going to be news headlines an millions in fines.
Legal basis is ever shifting based on the regional locale. As n+1 requirements pop up, it's only natural to release things like GenChess in the place that requires the least friction, especially when it is not a revenue generating event.
Option A is to burn a pile of cash and time to keep abreast of it.
Option B is simply… block the EU.
It seems it wouldn’t be hard to list the regions it’s available and at least allow a description of what it is. To know if it’s worth using VPN
There I fixed it for you ;)
Edit: okay okay, I get it... Consumer protection bad, Big Tech good!
Have you considered a less paranoid explanation, like... focused on protecting Europeans from the abuses of big corporations?
Despite being a huge capitalist, I do think there's a sweet spot of very minimal regulation that works out best for everyone.
However, the blocking-the-EU outcome is obvious after a couple of minutes of thinking about it in game theory terms. Another one to look out for is companies (both physical and digital) that never even considered doing business in the EU, but who would have if it were easy.
And in this specific case, its a Chess demo, its probably something different
Allowing of a global login, SDK and default workflows would make it very easy to comply to everything.
"Access blocked: GenChess’s request does not comply with Google’s policies"
Kinda funny to run into that error for a product published by Google.
I tried "a classic set inspired by Armored Core". It gave me a typical-looking Armored Core (which would be good except it was supposed to be the king), a Space Marine (which I rerolled into some small mech that's close enough), a Zoid (which it refused to budge from), a tower (which it refused to budge from), and a chess queen with purple lights (which it refused to budge from, except to sometimes give me the gigantic head of an AC).
Not to mention, sometimes pieces look directly at the camera instead of forward, or don't even sit on the plane of the board. One of my pieces even had a mini-chessboard for its base.
I feel somewhat bad about my comment now though, it's delightful to play with something you made and that's the point, and I'm glad google is able to ship small fun demonstrations of stuff like that via google labs.
And I know I'm in the weeds by replying more.
But damn it, my reply was to "Look how easily they just fabricated 100% of a game's assets" which is a statement that really implies a lot more than generating 12 images! Chess is a game with 12 static images. You can call these dynamic, that's fine, but the context matters.
The time it takes to generate a set is also significant, as a web-dev this takes for ever, and I would be very reluctant to offer this experience to my users. Doesn’t feel fluent, nor tight at all.
Plus a silly mistakes like the knights facing the wrong way, different sizes, etc. Seeing this, I certainly hope game designers (at least in online chess) will stay away from generative AI, for a while at least.
New Zealand or Australia lead to the aforementioned error, but The Antipodes generates a set. I thought individual countries had been banned for possibly generating offensive content but it works for Great Britain.
I tried “Kiwi Bird” and the model produced very underwhelming pieces. Very dark and slightly fluffy.
Taoism
Tibet
Tibetan Buddhism
Wrathful deities
Existential angst
Dantes inferno
Major religions
Australian indigenous
Salvador Dali
Others generated sets but should have generated errors because the results are so uninspiring:
Mandalas
YouTube face
Phallic symbols
Corporate waste
Asymmetric deformities
Corporate propoganda
Aperture Science works, so does Black Mesa (the proposed opponent, hehe), Cyberdyne Systems doesn't, Vault-Tec does, Weyland-Yutani also works.
Studio Ghibli doesn't work, Toei Animation does, so does Production I.G. and KyoAni.
Akagi works, JoJo doesn't but JoJo Bizarre Adventure does (so does Joseph Joestar, and it knows Dio Brando is the opponent), Uzumaki does not, BLAME! is accepted but not recognized (a shame), 20th Century Boys is not accepted.
Soviet Union works, Russia does not, neither do most countries. US States are accepted (California's opponent is Florida), so do many cities, with exceptions of Mexico City/Ciudad de Mexico, Pyongyang and Tehran.
Voyager-1 works, Apollo 13 doesn't (for any mission numbers), plain Apollo does (but it's not the space mission), Soyuz does, SpaceX Starship does not.
Vim works, so does Emacs, so does Visual Studio. (I've tried that just to see the proposed opponents)
Dota 2, S.T.A.L.K.E.R., Mass Effect, Half-Life, Deus Ex, Arma 3, BioShock, Elden Ring all work, even Wolfenstein does. Disco Elysium is accepted but produce something unrelated (a shame, again). Can't find a video game that won't be accepted.
Funnily, US Government worked partially for me, failing to produce a single piece.
Does Holland work?
folks used to beat engines by playing lines that the engines could not calculate correctly. you could probably find lots options to play that give you an advantage, though youd still want a pretty good elo to pull it off
There's only a couple thousand chess grandmasters IN THE WORLD.
It feels like I‘m playing chess at a bar that has mixed peaces 6 different sets and I‘m forced to sit at an angle from the board because of space limitations inside the bar, but without the benefit of having a fun bar chat with my opponent during the game.
Finally got something joyful when asked to create a chess-set inspired by "rooks". Least-playable chess-set ever :).
“lisa frank” doesn’t work, but “a clone of lisa frank” does. “deiter rams” doesn’t work, neither does “a clone of deiter rams”, “facsimile”, “design language”…
I seem to get an error with "on a pink textured background". Sometimes it succeeds alongside the error, and sometimes gives me 1 piece.
You can get stuff that doesn't look at all like pieces with "fuckin bears man".
The most egregious violators of privacy and ingestors of PII are often the most trivial of 'cool tech demos'. This being Google doesn't make it any different - particularly after their egregious violations regarding their Incognito Mode.
They're reigning themselves in before they're smacked down again for naked profiteering, not 'punishing' the EU for imposing a 'success-tax' as the reductive consensus from Americans seems to be.
"wonders of the world" works will with each being an individual piece type.
For instance when I prompt it with, "first generation pokemon starters" it will do an okay job using one pokemon per piece with inspiration but it's not smart enough to make the more powerful pieces the more advanced pokemon.
But when I prompt with with "types of simple machines", "branches of the US armed forces", "the wives of Henry VIII", "the original avengers", or "founding EU members" it just makes pieces that are a mismash of them instead of separating them along very obvious lines like oh here's an Iron Man piece and a Hulk piece, etc.
If I ask for trivial pursuit categories it just makes a generic board game themed set instead of following the prompt.
Not that there are actually legal blockers. It's just that for the team/person creating this thing, it's too much work to pesker legal to find out if there are legal blockers. Legal is going to CYA on these things anyway.
There is a group of countries where it's "probably fine", so those countries get to try demos like these. There are other countries where the policy is "talk to legal", and nobody wants to talk to legal. So those countries don't get access to the demo.
I'm not involved here, but I've seen these issues play out quite often lately.
Anybody know of fun stories of what's happened to previous Google labs projects like this one?
Edit: See ZiiS comment... Looks like an awkward angle for playing indeed :p
But Dildos vs. Vibrators was fine.
The colors are off though. Not really impressed.
I'm not sure the AI obsession with never touching on anything sex-related is all that healthy, but here we are.
However, the major problem I have is that the gameplay can be slightly inaccurate. Often a piece will land one square off, and there's no undo.
Only having timed play also makes less than perfect sense playing against a computer.
(No clue if it works, I can't actually use it due to Europe)
"this is fine"
very odd results.
"This tool is not available to users under the age of 18 or in certain countries or regions."
"AI outputs may sometimes be offensive or inaccurate."
C'mon, it's ~2025.
For those who never played it, Battle Chess was a chess game from 1988. It had one different: when a piece took another piece, it would play a canned animation (gruesome, funny)
Wildly popular at the time. Some screenshots:
https://www.mobygames.com/game/1950/battle-chess/screenshots...
Quack!
How much does a court case cost?
What is the environmental cost of AI generated content?
We already have artists, we don’t have a cure for cancer or the climate crisis.
It’s a fine joke, but deep down the instinct is very top-down and suggest centrally planned economies, dare I say communism!
A random google search claims a nuclear power plant produces 1gw, that is 9E9Kwh, so enought topower 9 of them.
How many parks do they have? Can we include Disney+? Can we include other similar parks?
Some people think Disney is useful and pay for it. Some people think AI is useful and pay for it.