[HN Gopher] Real Time Chess - A physical chess board without the...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Real Time Chess - A physical chess board without the concept of
       turns
        
       Author : dschuessler
       Score  : 173 points
       Date   : 2025-03-29 11:41 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | vunderba wrote:
       | There was a demo from around 5+ years ago of a experimental real-
       | time Chess board which looked remarkably similar. Once a piece
       | was moved, a visible circular timer with a duration proportional
       | to the piece valuation would count down until they were allowed
       | to move the piece again.
       | 
       | I wish I could find the link but trying to search YT for relevant
       | results older than a couple years is just trash.
        
         | hnlmorg wrote:
         | Could it be the Kung Fu Chess games mentioned in the video?
        
       | mnky9800n wrote:
       | Why is ass and anal bolded in the readme? The git blame says you
       | did it. Haha.
        
         | iwontberude wrote:
         | I think the ass speaks for itself
        
         | quuxplusone wrote:
         | https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/26/sport/hans-niemann-denies-sex...
        
         | xg15 wrote:
         | I think it's a nod to the controversy he alluded to in the
         | previous sentences, which exposed some more unorthodox cheating
         | strategies. You can read about it in the link.
        
         | meowface wrote:
         | It refers to a player accused of cheating against Magnus
         | Carlsen, with widespread speculation that the cheating might've
         | been done using an anal vibrator.
         | 
         | (There's zero evidence it actually was an anal device; no one
         | knows how he might've cheated if he indeed cheated. It just
         | became a big meme.)
        
           | mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
           | Hans Niemann almost certainly did not cheat against Carlsen.
           | Carlsen just played that game rather poorly and ragequit the
           | tournament because he's a baby who can't handle losing.
           | 
           | I do think Niemann may have cheated in OTB chess before. But
           | not at the Sinquefield Cup, I just don't see it. And the only
           | evidence is insinuations from a sore loser who's well known
           | for throwing tantrums when he doesn't get his way.
           | 
           | The buttplug stuff was really just a joke from reddit, no
           | one's seriously suggested anyone is actually cheating using a
           | buttplug. Doesn't even make sense as a way of cheating,
           | really. It would be extremely obvious.
        
             | olddustytrail wrote:
             | Hans Niemann almost certainly did cheat against Carlsen.
             | Everyone who knows about chess found that game hugely
             | suspicious (see Hikaru's comments on it).
             | 
             | The idea that Carlsen can't stand losing is a theory from
             | people who don't know about chess. His lose rate is about
             | 15%. All GMs lose games all the time. It's keeping the win
             | rate as high as possible that makes them the best.
             | 
             | The notion that any GM would get so upset simply about
             | losing a single game is just nonsense.
        
       | xg15 wrote:
       | > _so this should be a pretty uncontroversial minor rules update_
       | 
       | My kind of humor.
       | 
       | Always found it an interesting aspect of chess that the most
       | "common sense" rules (Players take turns; no skipping; one move
       | per turn) result in the most unintuitive outcomes and a massive
       | increase in complexity: Suddenly you can reason about the pieces
       | a player _won 't_ be able to move in a turn, you can double-bind
       | players, you get draws where its provably impossible for any
       | player to win, etc.
       | 
       | (In that sense, chess is a bit like the IntercalScript language
       | earlier today: All features are superficially reasonable and in
       | the service of simplicity, yet result in the weirdest outcomes)
       | 
       | Wouldn't all this be gone for chess without turns?
       | 
       | Or would strategies become even more intricate, e.g. taking into
       | account the minimum time you'd require to physically move a
       | piece?
        
         | NhanH wrote:
         | The strategies will change, but it is not certain to be more
         | "intricate", it could go both way.
         | 
         | It is probably more likely that adding the other physical
         | limitation of the human body causes one strategy to be vastly
         | more effective, and the game becomes less intricate. The reason
         | is fairly simple: a game does not become "intricate" or
         | "interesting" by accident. We iterated through a lot variations
         | before we settled down on _this_ version of chess that has the
         | suitable intricacy for us. Adding a new factor probably needs a
         | couple more decades / centuries of refinement before we get to
         | a version that has similar property to the current one.
         | 
         | The similar situation in Starcraft: for machines that plays the
         | game, certain units just become the only way to play (mostly
         | long range high damage units). Human can't choose 100 targets
         | at once, machines can. If you balance the game for machines,
         | then those units would be useless for human players
        
         | dullcrisp wrote:
         | If you like the humor you should watch the linked video!
        
         | JumpCrisscross wrote:
         | > _you can reason about the pieces a player won 't be able to
         | move in a turn_
         | 
         | Zugzwang [1].
         | 
         | (Also works if you get blessed with a competitor who acts
         | impulsively when confused or flustered.)
         | 
         | [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zugzwang
        
       | akrotkov wrote:
       | I spent hundreds of hours 20 years ago playing Kung Fu Chess[1],
       | which was the (first?) online version of this concept. That was a
       | fun time.
       | 
       | The physical board and magnets definitely add a cool factor to it
       | as does the physical dexterity element. Nice project!
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kung-Fu_Chess
        
         | ece wrote:
         | The Wikipedia page mentions the Chezz app, and it's available
         | and fun. Reminds me of really bad chess too.
        
       | rideontime wrote:
       | Don't miss the linked video on YouTube, the first 30 seconds had
       | me hooked. Very impressive project and production values to
       | match.
        
       | HenryBemis wrote:
       | > Chess is boring. I'm boring..
       | 
       | Nope. You are boring (and feel free to be). Chess is not boring.
       | That's it.
        
       | vlovich123 wrote:
       | For those wondering how the players could take pieces during the
       | cool down, you're allowed to move your opponent's piece because
       | you wear a strap with different frequencies (500hz and 750hz)
       | which lets the board know who is and isn't allowed to move a
       | piece.
        
       | Aperocky wrote:
       | Highly suggest to check out his homepage:
       | https://github.com/misprit7, as its not the first time I've seen
       | his project up here (and deservedly so!), his foosbar machine was
       | definitely worth a watch:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrwXZXGiP1w
       | 
       | As a fellow engineer, I am in awe - I wonder what his full time
       | colleagues think when he walks in as an intern with that kind of
       | github presence.
        
       | misprit7 wrote:
       | Hey, I'm the one who made this! My video on it probably does a
       | better job of explaining it than the github so I'd recommend
       | checking that out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7VtSK23_Jg
       | 
       | If anyone has any questions about the engineering process/game
       | itself I'd be happy to answer.
        
         | joymonger wrote:
         | I'd agree that the video is much more captivating. It's really
         | an incredible and innovative piece of hardware. I am curious,
         | did you ever arrange a meetup with Magnus?
        
           | misprit7 wrote:
           | No :(
        
             | spuz wrote:
             | I'd really love to see some high level players try it. Did
             | you get anywhere with letting Hikaru have a go? I know that
             | he said he would be interested when he watched your video.
        
         | sparky_z wrote:
         | Does the system of electromagnets do anything to enforce legal
         | vs illegal moves? Seems like another way for your untrustworthy
         | friends to cheat. When your opponent's distracted, just put
         | your queen anywhere you like.
         | 
         | Also, is there a rule about moving one piece at a time? I was
         | surprised I didn't see anyone two-handing it. If it were me, my
         | opening move would be to grab 4 pawns at one (2 in each hand)
         | and shifting them all forward two spaces. That would have been
         | my first instinct.
        
           | misprit7 wrote:
           | No. The intention with the electromagnets wasn't really to
           | prevent malicious cheating, just mostly to enforce cooldowns
           | since it's very easy to forget/miss the different color of
           | lights. The games are generally very chaotic and due to user
           | error there are usually a few incorrect touches throughout
           | the game that have to be quickly corrected manually anyways,
           | so enforcing legal moves wouldn't make the experience better.
           | 
           | As for moving multiple pieces at once, the rule I have is
           | only one hand and one piece at a time. This goes a long way
           | towards preventing accidental bumps into other pieces and
           | weird board states where there are multiple pieces in the
           | process of being moved at once.
        
       | elijahbenizzy wrote:
       | This is amazing! I love that it requires very fancy hardware that
       | is well designed. It's good someone finally made a chess game
       | appropriate for the tiktok generation.
        
       | Nifty3929 wrote:
       | Nice use of bold in the pitch!
        
       | gus_massa wrote:
       | Is it possible to make the squares sligtly conical (like a dinner
       | plate) with the magnet at the bottom, so the pieces are aligned
       | naturaly in the center when they land?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-03-29 23:00 UTC)