[Event "Live Chess"]
[Site "Chess.com"]
[Date "2018.02.21"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Big Pawn"]
[Black "NN"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C87"]
[CurrentPosition "

click for larger view

"]

Game 30

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6 4.O-O Nf6 5.Re1 Be7 6.c3 a6 7.Ba4 Bg4 8.d4 exd4

Black gives up the center but finds it difficult to work up an eventual counterattack.

9.cxd4 Bxf3 10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.Qxf3 O-O 12.Nc3 Rb8 13.Qd3

Attacks a6, gives access to c4, protects the b1 square, gets out of the way of the f pawn.

13...Qc8 14.Rb1

I wanted to avoid creating any weaknesses.

14...Re8 15.h3

A waiting move that also keeps Black's knight out of g4, should I put the bishop there.

15...Bf8 16.Bg5 Nd7 17.Be3

Playing against ...c5

17...g6 18.b4

Restraining ...c5 but he could still play it. 18...c5 19.bc Rxb1 20.Rxb1 dc 21.d5!?. Black has weak q-side pawns.

However, 18...a5! starts black's counterattack. 19.ba Ra8 20.Qc4 (eyeing c6) Qa6 21.Qa4 Bg7 22.Rec1 and Stockfish says White has a slight edge, but not much. Maybe 18.b4 gave black something to work with and 18.b3 was more compact, keeping the slight advantage.

18...d5 19.exd5 Bxb4 20.dxc6 Nf6 21.Bd2 a5

Black wants to blockade with his knight on d5 after exchanging on c3.

22.d5 Rd8 23.Qd4!

So that if 23...Bxc3 24.Bxc3 the d5 pawn is untouchable.

23... Rd6 24.a3!

decoy - if 24...Bxa3 then 25.Nb5

Rapid Game verses NM Anatoly Trubman
Chess.com

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "BIG PAWN"]
[Black "scenicregal"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo ""]
[BlackElo ""]
[ECO ""]
[CurrentPosition "

click for larger view

"]

1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 Nf6 4.e5 Nd5 5.Nf3 e6 6.cxd4 Na6

click for larger view

I had never seen this move before so I thought a while on it. My opponent told me that no one plays it but him. He's got a system worked out for it where black plays ...b5 after any move by white, except Nc3.

7.Nc3 Nxc3 8.bxc3 Qa5 9.Bd2 d5 10.Bd3 Bd7 11.O-O Rc8 12.Ng5 Be7 13.Qh5 g6 14.Qh6 Bf8 15.Qh4 Bg7 16.Qf4 O-O 17.Qh4 h6 18.Nf3 Qd8 19.Qg3 b5 20.Rab1 Nc7

I think one of the problems with putting the knight on a6 in the first place is that it has a hard time getting back to the kingside should it be needed there for defense.

21.Nh4 g5

Black played this rather quickly as White was planning a sac on g6, but ...g5 allows white to peel open the position.

22.Nf3 f5 23.exf6 Qxf6 24.Ne5 Be8 25.f4

Now black had to think. The queen is not happy on f6 across from this rook on f1 and his rooks are not connected, so opening the f-file isn't pleasant for black.

25...gxf4 26.Rxf4 Qe7 27.Rg4 h5 28.Rg5 a5 29.Bc2

I think this is the decisive regrouping, unless stockfish says otherwise when I run the game through it.

29...b4

Black's last two moves gave white a free hand.

BBC, February 22, 2018

White nationalist Jared Taylor is suing Twitter after the social network banned his account as part of a crackdown on abusive content.

Mr Taylor’s lawyer says the suspension of his account is a form of censorship, accusing Twitter of discrimination.

Twitter declined to comment on the case but has previously said that its tools are “apolitical”.

Mr Taylor is head of American Renaissance, a website that champions “racial difference”.

He had his account suspended in December, with Twitter explaining that it prohibited accounts affiliated with the promotion of violence, something Mr Taylor denies applied to him.

Mr Taylor has filed his case in California, in the state Superior Court in San Francisco. He argued that Twitter violated Californian law protecting free speech in public spaces — a law that has not previously been applied to the internet.

His lawyer Noah Peters wrote online that everyone should be “terrified” about what he called Twitter censorship.

“Our lawsuit is not about whether Taylor is right or wrong. It’s about whether Twitter and other technology companies have the right to ban individuals from using their services based on their perceived viewpoints and affiliations.

“Allowing Twitter to censor content is extremely troublesome given Twitter’s self-proclaimed mission to ‘give everyone the power to create and share ideas instantly, without barriers’.”

Social media firms have been under increasing pressure from governments to deal with both fake news and abusive content on their networks.

This week, Twitter banned some accounts suspected of being Russian bots.

Locked-out users had to provide a telephone number which they then had to verify in order to prove they were real.

That purge has also drawn a lot of criticism, with some users raising concerns that the lock-out was aimed at accounts expressing right-wing political beliefs.

Similar challenges to Twitter’s account closures have been filed before. Conservative activist Charles Johnson has a lawsuit against Twitter pending in California after he was banned in 2015.

I did find it interesting! After a while, I just started skipping all the posts except the ones about the moral argument (which were mostly from you, <jls> and <Nisj>).

Bartle posts kept popping up in between. I felt like a diner in a nice restaurant, enjoying a delicious hearty steak (the moral argument posts), with some old fool coming by, over and over, offering stale after-dinner mints from the hostess podium.

That's what <saffuna>'s posts were like.

Anyway, <Nisj> offered a circular argument to rebut the moral argument, but you never answered it. So I jumped in to point it out.

I also argued why <jls>' "Bob the Programmer" concept is not interchangeable with God as the locus of OMV.

I did see you show <nizzle> that his response was circular, because he used his premise as his conclusion. But I didn't say what he said I did, about needing an "alive" locus of moral values and that God could die and all that nonsense.

He's just trolling. He knows he's outclassed.

And yes, you easily showed <jls> why his extremely unserious "bob" example didn't fit the bill, but I think he knew that already and is basically trolling. Either that or he thought he had a great point, but I can't honestly imagine that.

The follow up posts with <spouge> were interesting because I caught him trying to play the shell game, shifting from the moral argument to the ontological argument (when he introduced Frege's "existence is a second order predicate" argument), hoping that no one would notice, but it would appear that he's sufficiently muddied the waters to the point where "no one knows" who's right and wrong anymore.

I handled that.

Cool to hear you are out in Japan doing business and living it up, going out to eat and enjoying life.

I think you are right about <jls> - he is fairly bright and so Bob the Programmer seems more like mathematician trash talk than serious debate.

To me the more interesting aspect is that <al wazir> basically made the same case regarding premise 1.

After <aw> failed to post a link where he refuted the moral argument, and I complained about him posting 14 pages of a search result instead, he recapitulated his criticisms, and one of them is that in premise 1 God can be replaced with just about anything, such as the "OMV committee".

I suspect <aw> truly believes it, whereas <jls> may be trolling.

<The follow up posts with <spouge> were interesting because I caught him trying to play the shell game, shifting from the moral argument to the ontological argument (when he introduced Frege's "existence is a second order predicate" argument), hoping that no one would notice, but it would appear that he's sufficiently muddied the waters to the point where "no one knows" who's right and wrong anymore.

I handled that.>

Yes, and not many could, because although we have some well-educated folks in the forum, most don't know formal philosophy as well as <jls>. I certainly don't.

So your responses to him were definitely educational for me.

<Cool to hear you are out in Japan doing business and living it up, going out to eat and enjoying life.

What do you eat when you are out there?>

I prefer Japanese cuisine when I am here. It is hard to get any authentic Japanese food in the States, other than sushi.

Tonight my coworker and I had fried Tako (pronounced "taco"), which is octopus, for an appetizer, and for the main course he had udon noodles and I had soba noodles.

You just about cannot go wrong with seafood here, since we are in a port city with daily fresh catches from the bay.

The women are incredibly sexy, but very conservative and shy.

Fixed.

Which three individuals had their chessforum shut down for repeated rule violations?

This game is not won on tactics, but on space, the open file, the seventh rank and the active king. My opponent played the Nimzovich-Larsen opening, but exchanged his LSB very early giving Black an easy game.

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "NN"]
[Black "Big Pawn"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo ""]
[BlackElo ""]
[ECO ""]
[CurrentPosition "

click for larger view

"]

https://redice.tv/red-ice-tv/harvar...

Didn't read it, however, I do have some thoughts on uncontrolled borders in general.

<BP>, do you know <when> illegal immigration into the US, across our border with Mexico, exploded in volume?

It was decades ago! When I was a kid, or even earlier. See, my mother had all kinds of magazine subscriptions when I was a kid. Not foofy lady stuff, but news magazines like Time and Newsweek.

It was lat 1970s or early 1980s when I read an article in Time about the uncontrolled flood of illegals from the South, coming into the US

Back then, as an innocent kid, it didn't cross my mind that this was anything other than negligence by our government. They didn't have the manpower to enforce the border.

Back then, I didn't stop to think it might be <intentional> on the part of our policy makers. Now, I am convinced it is intentional.

I had and still have mixed emotions about Trump. But one of the best, very best things about Trump is that he stuck it to the establishment, the only 2 significant political parties in the US. Both major parties have been bought on immigration. Politicians from both have ignored the will of the people on this issue.

The politicians have stuck it to our working class, for their own political gain. It was good to see Trump make them pay for it.

Low Energy Jeb and the arrogant Bush cabal got their comeuppance. Jeb thought he would waltz right into the Whitehouse, with Obama out of the way. And Trump said no, you won't! Hahaha!

http://listverse.com/2018/02/19/10-...

#1 is dumb TV shows.

10 things that lower intelligence>

Spanking?

Probably the other way.

Dumb kid/gets into trouble/gets spanked.

This entire premise and its necessary conclusion are both faulty. First, a change in 3-5 IQ points is too dependent on test variability to have meaningful significance, especially for children. Second, there was no connection to the parents' IQ, i.e., less intelligent parents might spank their less intelligent children more often. Third, children with lower intelligence might display more behavioral problems requiring discipline, compared to smarter children who understand cause/effect earlier. Fourth, even if this association was completely correct, correlation does not mean causation. I suspect this entire project was riddled with investigator bias by the researchers, for a good cause, of course.

This entire premise and its necessary conclusion are both faulty.>

If spanking made you stupid, liberals would be for spanking kids 24/7.

So maybe I posted something that is completely crap.

Maybe everything on the list is false?

Then the jet lag didn't make me dumber.

So I was smart to post the link, which means it is useful information.

Which means the jet lag DID make me dumber.

Which is why I posted a bunch of crap that isn't true.

Including the part about jet lag making me dumber.

So, in conclusion, we are trapped in a circular argument.

Circling the drain, so to speak.

Without reading the study in question, I can picture these academics set out to prove that corporal punishment harms children somehow, then voila, their results matched their theory. Those of us who were spanked as children were hardly spanked every day, but we knew the threat was sincere, compared to today's "Time Out" response which is pretty empty in comparison. Beware agenda-driven research of any kind.

The 2016 Presidential election taught us to distrust polls. One headline blared, "43 Percent Of Americans Say Trump Should Withdraw From Presidential Race" after the October TMZ surprise, except this was based on 242 people:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/43-p...

Even worse, those respondents bothered to answer this stupid question in the first place, which would be another source of anti-Trump bias.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSo...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nal...

I understand that IQ has been extensively studied and is better than nothing, however I object to using the number as a label, also ignoring other factors like drive and talent and industriousness.

<Researchers say that being swatted as a child can be a chronic stressor for kids, causing them to become easily startled and often fearful. These factors are associated with a lower IQ.>

Here I believe they intentionally blurred the line between corporal punishment and child abuse, reinforcing their agenda.

<Corporal punishment rates have been declining globally. Scientists believe this will lead to a worldwide increase in average IQs.>

Here I believe they intentionally blurred the line between corporal punishment and child abuse, reinforcing their agenda.>

I agree wholeheartedly.

<...also ignoring other factors like drive and talent and industriousness.>