Law in the Internet Society

View   r3  >  r2  >  r1
BenMingovSecondEssay 3 - 14 Jan 2025 - Main.BenMingov
Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="SecondEssay"
Changed:
<
<

Chess as Esport: An Inevitable Decline

>
>

Attitudes Toward Surveillance in American Society: Interpretations and Prescriptions

 
Changed:
<
<
Chess has long been described as a marriage between art and science – a pursuit that rewards calculation and logic, but one that also expresses the personalities of its practitioners. For centuries, chess has remained largely unchanged and its appeal has endured. Chess greatness, throughout cultures and eras, has almost invariably been connected with the idea of genius. More than this, the game has occupied a prominent place in shaping culture around the world, arguably reaching its pinnacle in 1972 when Bobby Fisher and Boris Spassky represented the USA and the Soviet Union, respectively, in the World Chess Championship. The champion would earn their respective superpower the reputation as the other’s intellectual superior.
>
>

Current State of Surveillance

 
Changed:
<
<
In recent years, however, the marketing of chess to the world has undergone a dramatic transformation – from being presented as a timeless game associated with classicality and intellect into a modern esport. While this modernization has brought new energy and enthusiasm to the game and has expanded its player pool and audience, I argue that this sudden and fundamental change in the way chess is communicated and shared will have negative effects on its long-term survival in the mainstream, if it is not tempered at least in part.
>
>
Nearly everything we do today is capable of being converted into a data point for some third-party to collect and sell to downstream consumers of metadata for various purposes. To these purchasers, humans can be reduced to the collection of data points created by their virtual actions. But it’s not just data produced from virtual action, our movement through the physical world is also tracked to a significant degree. In 2020, there were already approximately 70 million surveillance cameras in the US and from 2020 to 2021, it was estimated that an additional 15 million would be installed, with schools, malls, and offices being important for this growth.https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-billion-surveillance-cameras-forecast-to-be-watching-within-two-years-11575565402?mod=hp_listb_pos1. Perhaps even more insidious is the fact that even within our homes, in which Americans have a long-held constitutional right to privacy, we are not shielded from virtual or physical tracking, as our cherished smartphones and Wi-Fi give away our every move.https://www.fastcompany.com/90772483/yes-you-are-being-watched-even-if-no-one-is-looking-for-you
 
Changed:
<
<
Chess’s transformation to esport has three main features that I think will be most negative for its longevity. These are faster time controls, instant analysis provided by chess engines, and the trend toward both professional and casual chess being played on monitors rather than across the board from an opponent.
>
>

American’s Attitudes Towards the Current State of Surveillance

 
Changed:
<
<

Faster Time Controls

>
>
The United States is home to a diverse population, but people’s opinions regarding this omnipresent surveillance are remarkably consistent. To demonstrate this, let’s look at a Pew Research Center survey, in which “93% of adults say that being in control of who can get information about them is important” and that “90% says that controlling what information is collected about them is important.”https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2015/05/20/americans-attitudes-about-privacy-security-and-surveillance/ And a large majority of respondents expressed a lack of confidence in the ability of government agencies, landline telephone companies, credit card companies, search engine providers, and many other collectors of human data to keep their information private and secure._Id._ What is quite notable, however, is the fact that 91% of respondents, despite their strong views, “had not made any changes in their internet or cell phone use to avoid having their activities tracked or noticed” – we will return to this result._Id._
 
Changed:
<
<
For most of chess’s history, master-level games have been played at very slow time controls. There is also a rich history of recording chess games using chess notation. It is because of this combination of both deep thought and meticulous recording that each successive generation of chess players and fans have been able to stand on the shoulders of their predecessors.
>
>

Why Surveillance Should Exist in Some Form

 
Changed:
<
<
Fast forwarding to today, games are still recorded, but faster time controls have become the norm, on both the professional circuit and in casual chess. I believe the reason for this is the shorter attention span of audiences that have so much more competition for their attention than did generations past. But causation aside, chess will suffer both in substance and in its appreciation by fans in the long-term if this is not addressed. Shorter games produce fewer creative or novel ideas. All chess fans know the creative genius that is Mikhail Tal, the dynamic aggression that is Garry Kasparov, and the boa constrictor that is Anatoly Karpov, but far fewer fans now can associate even the most well-known players of today with any particular style. Could this be because the modern game has favored a more universal approach? It is possible, but I find it unlikely to be the main reason for this.
>
>
On the other end of this argument is the valid interest to have some baseline level of monitoring and data collection that would serve important public interests, but without reaching the level of an unwarranted privacy invasion. For example, people might want cameras in public places as a means of deterring crime. And others might want the data collection capabilities of their smartphones and smartwatches to track their locations if they are lost or missing, as well as measure their heart rates and other vital signs. To this effect, a survey conducted found that a small majority believed that security cameras reduce crimehttps://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/june_2019/americans_feel_safer_with_public_cameras_but_some_say_they_re_too_nosy – this indicates that this is not a fringe belief, whether it is accurate or not. Too little information gathering means we risk being uninformed and unprepared in important situations, and too much information gathering means we risk having our private activities and proclivities exposed in public spheres and repudiating any privacy that our Constitution protects.
 
Changed:
<
<

Instant Analysis

>
>

Demographic Changes Mean Urgent Action is Needed

 
Changed:
<
<
One of the most profound changes in the chess world has been the rise of powerful chess engines. While undeniably useful for training and analysis, they have fundamentally altered how players and fans interact with the game.
>
>
One of the alarming findings of these surveys is that younger generations, primarily Gen Z, are more accepting of the perpetual state of surveillance. “Americans under the age of 30 stand out when it comes to 1984-style in-home government surveillance cameras. 3 in 10 (29 percent) Americans under 30 favor ‘the government installing surveillance cameras in every household’ in order to ‘reduce domestic violence, abuse, and other illegal activity.’ Support declines with age, dropping to 20 percent among 30-44 year olds and dropping considerably to 6 percent among those over the age of 45.”https://www.cato.org/blog/nearly-third-gen-z-favors-home-government-surveillance-cameras-1 One likely and logical reason for this is the fact that younger generations have grown up with ubiquitous surveillance as the default way of life and, perhaps as a result, have been conditioned to accept it. If this is the case, it seems that the fight against constant and ever-increasing surveillance must be accelerated while generations who have not lived with this as the norm are alive and capable of fighting for an alternative.
 
Changed:
<
<
In the pre-engine era, analyzing a game was often a multi-person and thought-intensive exercise. Friends or club members would gather to dissect a master game, discussing possible alternatives and variations. This process deepened people’s understanding and appreciation for the game’s intricacies. Today, engines instantly deliver the “best move,” bypassing the need for critical thinking or debate. This shift risks turning chess into an exercise of passive consumption rather than an active exploration of human ingenuity.
>
>

What Should Be Done

 
Changed:
<
<

Less IRL Competition

>
>
There must be a seismic recalibration in the way that information about people is currently gathered and how that information is treated afterwards. It seems that one of the most important modifications to the current system would be to bifurcate the practice of data collection into two categories, collection that is either (i) essential for the public health and safety or (ii) for any other purpose. Data collection and tracking for business purposes rather than collection for non-pretextual health and safety purposes should be regulated under completely different rubrics.
 
Changed:
<
<
The last major problem with the new approach to modern chess is that most games are played online rather than over-the-board. There are even many professional tournaments conducted with players competing in the same room, but each in front of their monitor. I believe this removes the essential element of human interaction from the game.

This type of interaction with the game renders your opponents faceless and nameless, and takes away the feeling of sharing the game with your adversary. It also obviates the need for players to conduct a post-game analysis together, which has long been a great tradition of the game. While, of course, it wouldn’t make sense to recede from the era of online chess, which has provided people with the ability to play many more games than ever before. But at the very least, tournaments of any significance should be held in person and over-the-board.

But There Are Benefits . . .

The transformation of chess into an esport is not inherently negative. In fact, it has revitalized the game, introducing it to new audiences and ensuring its relevance in a fast-changing world. However, it is crucial to strike a balance between embracing modernity and preserving the essence of what makes chess special.

The modernization of chess has undeniably broadened its appeal. Platforms like Twitch and YouTube? have turned chess into a spectator sport, attracting audiences who might never have otherwise engaged with the game. Moreover, this new approach aligns with modern consumption habits. Traditional chess broadcasting – long games with minimal commentary – would struggle to captivate a modern audience, whereas chess streams are lively, interactive, and often feature shorter, fast-paced formats like blitz and bullet chess.

Lastly, this shift has shattered traditional barriers. Today, fans can watch Carlsen or Nakamura play live, listen to their thought processes, and even interact with them in chat or through play. This unprecedented access has fostered a sense of community and connection that was unimaginable in previous eras.

Final Thoughts

The appreciation of deep, complex positions with enough time to examine them, less computer-led analysis, and more in-person competition must remain central to the chess experience. This can be achieved by favoring slower time controls for tournaments with prizes and rating points, turning off the engine during commentary and training, and mandating over-the-board chess in tournaments.

This draft doesn't have anything to do with anything we did in the course you took. That's not exactly high commitment. This draft doesn't use any sources or make any effort to learn anything in particular. That's not high effort. "Faster time controls?" I played plenty of five minute chess when I was a youngster; has there been a boom in 2.5 minute? As you will recall, the Fischer-Spassky matches were timed at 2.5 hours per forty moves. If Magnus Carlson is made to play faster than Fischer you cite no source to support the claim and I was not aware of it. "Less IRL competition?" Have you forgotten that most of us in the 20th century played chess, sometimes or only, by mail?

You want to leave law school and I don't want to stop you. You don't want to write about law, to interact with the reading in the course or with any ideas I expressed in the course of my teaching, and I won't make you. You have in mind, as best I can tell, an expression of indifference to learning and my standards (which I hardly think are personal to me) of what differentiates bloviation from academic discipline. I won't stop you. If you cared, this would be a different draft. Given your energy and capacity, this might have been, for everyone else as well as for me and you, a different course. You have been, in your correspondence with me, greatly concerned with your mid-year graduation schedule and the bar exam, so it seems reasonable to conclude that this is the "how to spend no time with Eben and his stuff" solution. It will work just fine for that purpose.

Years from now, and not many, you will have occasion to reflect on this one moment when our paths crossed, when you had the opportunity to exchange ideas with me. This will be what you did with it. There will be no second chance then, because I will be gone, and your world will not contain someone else with whom you can do what you and I might have done. Perhaps you will have no regret. If you do, tough.

>
>
The first category would serve the purpose of preventing and responding to crime, natural disasters, and any other reason that would be primarily for the health and safety of the public. The ability of the government to collect data for public health and safety must be hawkishly monitored and limited to avoid infringement of people’s constitutional right to privacy. For example, we can draw from ACLU v. Clapper (2015), in which the court wrote that “such expansive development of government repositories of formerly private records would be an unprecedented contraction of the privacy expectations of all Americans. Perhaps such a contraction is required by national security needs in the face of the dangers of contemporary domestic and international terrorism. But we would expect such a momentous decision to be preceded by substantial debate, and expressed in unmistakable language.”https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2015/05/20/americans-attitudes-about-privacy-security-and-surveillance/ quoting pg. 74 of ACLU v. Clapper (2015)
  \ No newline at end of file
Added:
>
>
This possibility of data collection, however, should not exist for private companies. As Shoshana Zuboff laid out in her article, lawmakers should “interrupt and outlaw surveillance capitalism’s data supplies and revenue flows. This means, at the front end, outlawing the secret theft of private experience. At the back end, we can disrupt revenues by outlawing markets that trade in human futures . . .”https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/02/facebook-google-data-change-our-behaviour-democracy

BenMingovSecondEssay 2 - 07 Jan 2025 - Main.EbenMoglen
Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="SecondEssay"
Deleted:
<
<
 

Chess as Esport: An Inevitable Decline

Chess has long been described as a marriage between art and science – a pursuit that rewards calculation and logic, but one that also expresses the personalities of its practitioners. For centuries, chess has remained largely unchanged and its appeal has endured. Chess greatness, throughout cultures and eras, has almost invariably been connected with the idea of genius. More than this, the game has occupied a prominent place in shaping culture around the world, arguably reaching its pinnacle in 1972 when Bobby Fisher and Boris Spassky represented the USA and the Soviet Union, respectively, in the World Chess Championship. The champion would earn their respective superpower the reputation as the other’s intellectual superior.

Line: 38 to 37
 

Final Thoughts

The appreciation of deep, complex positions with enough time to examine them, less computer-led analysis, and more in-person competition must remain central to the chess experience. This can be achieved by favoring slower time controls for tournaments with prizes and rating points, turning off the engine during commentary and training, and mandating over-the-board chess in tournaments. \ No newline at end of file

Added:
>
>

This draft doesn't have anything to do with anything we did in the course you took. That's not exactly high commitment. This draft doesn't use any sources or make any effort to learn anything in particular. That's not high effort. "Faster time controls?" I played plenty of five minute chess when I was a youngster; has there been a boom in 2.5 minute? As you will recall, the Fischer-Spassky matches were timed at 2.5 hours per forty moves. If Magnus Carlson is made to play faster than Fischer you cite no source to support the claim and I was not aware of it. "Less IRL competition?" Have you forgotten that most of us in the 20th century played chess, sometimes or only, by mail?

You want to leave law school and I don't want to stop you. You don't want to write about law, to interact with the reading in the course or with any ideas I expressed in the course of my teaching, and I won't make you. You have in mind, as best I can tell, an expression of indifference to learning and my standards (which I hardly think are personal to me) of what differentiates bloviation from academic discipline. I won't stop you. If you cared, this would be a different draft. Given your energy and capacity, this might have been, for everyone else as well as for me and you, a different course. You have been, in your correspondence with me, greatly concerned with your mid-year graduation schedule and the bar exam, so it seems reasonable to conclude that this is the "how to spend no time with Eben and his stuff" solution. It will work just fine for that purpose.

Years from now, and not many, you will have occasion to reflect on this one moment when our paths crossed, when you had the opportunity to exchange ideas with me. This will be what you did with it. There will be no second chance then, because I will be gone, and your world will not contain someone else with whom you can do what you and I might have done. Perhaps you will have no regret. If you do, tough.

 \ No newline at end of file

BenMingovSecondEssay 1 - 04 Dec 2024 - Main.BenMingov
Line: 1 to 1
Added:
>
>
META TOPICPARENT name="SecondEssay"

Chess as Esport: An Inevitable Decline

Chess has long been described as a marriage between art and science – a pursuit that rewards calculation and logic, but one that also expresses the personalities of its practitioners. For centuries, chess has remained largely unchanged and its appeal has endured. Chess greatness, throughout cultures and eras, has almost invariably been connected with the idea of genius. More than this, the game has occupied a prominent place in shaping culture around the world, arguably reaching its pinnacle in 1972 when Bobby Fisher and Boris Spassky represented the USA and the Soviet Union, respectively, in the World Chess Championship. The champion would earn their respective superpower the reputation as the other’s intellectual superior.

In recent years, however, the marketing of chess to the world has undergone a dramatic transformation – from being presented as a timeless game associated with classicality and intellect into a modern esport. While this modernization has brought new energy and enthusiasm to the game and has expanded its player pool and audience, I argue that this sudden and fundamental change in the way chess is communicated and shared will have negative effects on its long-term survival in the mainstream, if it is not tempered at least in part.

Chess’s transformation to esport has three main features that I think will be most negative for its longevity. These are faster time controls, instant analysis provided by chess engines, and the trend toward both professional and casual chess being played on monitors rather than across the board from an opponent.

Faster Time Controls

For most of chess’s history, master-level games have been played at very slow time controls. There is also a rich history of recording chess games using chess notation. It is because of this combination of both deep thought and meticulous recording that each successive generation of chess players and fans have been able to stand on the shoulders of their predecessors.

Fast forwarding to today, games are still recorded, but faster time controls have become the norm, on both the professional circuit and in casual chess. I believe the reason for this is the shorter attention span of audiences that have so much more competition for their attention than did generations past. But causation aside, chess will suffer both in substance and in its appreciation by fans in the long-term if this is not addressed. Shorter games produce fewer creative or novel ideas. All chess fans know the creative genius that is Mikhail Tal, the dynamic aggression that is Garry Kasparov, and the boa constrictor that is Anatoly Karpov, but far fewer fans now can associate even the most well-known players of today with any particular style. Could this be because the modern game has favored a more universal approach? It is possible, but I find it unlikely to be the main reason for this.

Instant Analysis

One of the most profound changes in the chess world has been the rise of powerful chess engines. While undeniably useful for training and analysis, they have fundamentally altered how players and fans interact with the game.

In the pre-engine era, analyzing a game was often a multi-person and thought-intensive exercise. Friends or club members would gather to dissect a master game, discussing possible alternatives and variations. This process deepened people’s understanding and appreciation for the game’s intricacies. Today, engines instantly deliver the “best move,” bypassing the need for critical thinking or debate. This shift risks turning chess into an exercise of passive consumption rather than an active exploration of human ingenuity.

Less IRL Competition

The last major problem with the new approach to modern chess is that most games are played online rather than over-the-board. There are even many professional tournaments conducted with players competing in the same room, but each in front of their monitor. I believe this removes the essential element of human interaction from the game.

This type of interaction with the game renders your opponents faceless and nameless, and takes away the feeling of sharing the game with your adversary. It also obviates the need for players to conduct a post-game analysis together, which has long been a great tradition of the game. While, of course, it wouldn’t make sense to recede from the era of online chess, which has provided people with the ability to play many more games than ever before. But at the very least, tournaments of any significance should be held in person and over-the-board.

But There Are Benefits . . .

The transformation of chess into an esport is not inherently negative. In fact, it has revitalized the game, introducing it to new audiences and ensuring its relevance in a fast-changing world. However, it is crucial to strike a balance between embracing modernity and preserving the essence of what makes chess special.

The modernization of chess has undeniably broadened its appeal. Platforms like Twitch and YouTube? have turned chess into a spectator sport, attracting audiences who might never have otherwise engaged with the game. Moreover, this new approach aligns with modern consumption habits. Traditional chess broadcasting – long games with minimal commentary – would struggle to captivate a modern audience, whereas chess streams are lively, interactive, and often feature shorter, fast-paced formats like blitz and bullet chess.

Lastly, this shift has shattered traditional barriers. Today, fans can watch Carlsen or Nakamura play live, listen to their thought processes, and even interact with them in chat or through play. This unprecedented access has fostered a sense of community and connection that was unimaginable in previous eras.

Final Thoughts

The appreciation of deep, complex positions with enough time to examine them, less computer-led analysis, and more in-person competition must remain central to the chess experience. This can be achieved by favoring slower time controls for tournaments with prizes and rating points, turning off the engine during commentary and training, and mandating over-the-board chess in tournaments.


Revision 3r3 - 14 Jan 2025 - 22:20:15 - BenMingov
Revision 2r2 - 07 Jan 2025 - 20:49:35 - EbenMoglen
Revision 1r1 - 04 Dec 2024 - 03:15:05 - BenMingov
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM