Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

23-Year-Old Chess Grandmaster Whips Bill Gates In 71 Seconds

timothy posted about 8 months ago | from the how-long-would-you-last? dept.

Classic Games (Games) 449

MojoKid writes "There's no disputing that Bill Gates is blessed with a brilliant mind. Sure, he dropped out of Harvard College, but he got accepted into the elite institution of higher learning in the first place. Leading into his college career, Gates scored 1,590 out of 1,600 on the SAT. The rest is history — he went on to co-found Microsoft, built a net worth that's in the billions ($76.8 billion at last count), and now spends his time on his philanthropic efforts. Regardless, it took 23-year-old Magnus Carlsen, a "grandmaster" Chess player since the age of 13 and new world Chess champion, just 71 seconds to defeat Gates in a friendly game of Chess on a Norwegian television show. It takes longer to heat up a cup of water in the microwave."

cancel ×

449 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

microwave (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071679)

Your microwave sucks

Re:microwave (1)

raynet (51803) | about 8 months ago | (#46071717)

The microwave in the example does suck, even the very first microwave oven we got in the 80s did boil a glass of water in 60 seconds.

Re:microwave (1)

lucm (889690) | about 8 months ago | (#46071845)

The microwave in the example does suck, even the very first microwave oven we got in the 80s did boil a glass of water in 60 seconds.

Maybe it's not the microwave, maybe the guy does not keep his dishes clean. See http://www.snopes.com/science/... [snopes.com]

Runtime... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071681)

... Regardless, it took 23-year-old Magnus Carlsen, a "grandmaster" Chess player since the age of 13 and new world Chess champion, just 71 seconds to defeat Gates in a friendly game of Chess on a Norwegian television show. It takes longer to heat up a cup of water in the microwave."

And about as long as it takes Windows to blue-screen...

Re:Runtime... (3, Funny)

Rhinobird (151521) | about 8 months ago | (#46071751)

Oh, come on. That is such an old cliche. I mean, it's taken them 30 years, but Windows, now, doesn't crash for at LEAST 2 minutes...the time it takes to boot.

Re:Runtime... (5, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 months ago | (#46071789)

Well, you have to hand it to MS, they are consistent. No matter how fast your machine may get, they will adjust their OS to take the same time to boot up...

Re:Runtime... (0, Offtopic)

Megol (3135005) | about 8 months ago | (#46071861)

I'm realize you were trying to be funny (not that you were) but just for the record: my computer boots into Windows 8 to the desktop in 8 seconds - including the time to log in. It takes longer to boot into Linux last I tried.

Re:Runtime... (3, Interesting)

michelcolman (1208008) | about 8 months ago | (#46071891)

And how long does it take before you can actually use it? Maybe the desktop appears after 8 seconds, but the system is still configuring itself and, well, basically finishing the booting process, the antivirus system is still setting itself up, etcetera. Meanwhile you're clicking on icons and nothing happens, or at the very least it's extremely sluggish. At least that's what earlier versions of Windows were like, I haven't actually had the... err... pleasure to try Windows 8, so this is a genuine question.

Re:Runtime... (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 8 months ago | (#46071943)

Windows 8 is pretty good in this regard. They have moved more services to start only on demand so that they don't take up time on login.

Re:Runtime... (1)

pspahn (1175617) | about 8 months ago | (#46071953)

Indeed. The last blue screen I got was when I switched my bios to ACPI -- that was quickly resolved and totally my fault. Outside of that, I haven't seen a blue screen since 9x.

Re:Runtime... (1)

nschubach (922175) | about 8 months ago | (#46071989)

You must not game? I run windows 7 64-bit on my gaming machine and I can recall at least 4 blue screens. None of my hardware diagnostics indicate any problems and it's rare enough for me not to care all that much, but it does still happen.

Bill (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 8 months ago | (#46071689)

He should have brought a Chess computer.

Re:Bill (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071691)

He should have brought a Chess computer.

But i bet Bill would have won at minesweeper and solitaire.

Re:Bill (3, Funny)

marcello_dl (667940) | about 8 months ago | (#46071835)

> He should have brought a Chess computer.

Well, he was confident he could bribe the opponent's king into making a burning platform speech saying the only way out is to scrap all strategies and ask Gates directions, but the pawns did not buy it.

Big deal. (5, Insightful)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 8 months ago | (#46071693)

He lost to someone who spent much of their life practicing the game. That doesn't really mean anything. To be a chess grandmaster requires a great natural aptitude - but it also requires devotion to practice and study within that very narrow field.

Re:Big deal. (1)

nukenerd (172703) | about 8 months ago | (#46071727)

He lost to someone who spent much of their life practicing the game. That doesn't really mean anything.

No-one (except perhaps his closest worshippers) would have expected Gates to win. But 71 seconds ?? Surely most people who had played chess before could have held out that long.

Re:Big deal. (2)

hcs_$reboot (1536101) | about 8 months ago | (#46071747)

Kind of agree. Gates had 2mn to think, but he chose to play quick - probably not seeing what was coming. But anyone who played against a strong chess software, like Fritz, knows how quickly this thing takes you down. And Carlsen is better than Fritz..

Re:Big deal. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071797)

No, he's not. Give Fritz a powerful enough CPU and 8GB of RAM to hold opening/endgame tables, and it could beat any human player. The days where humans could beat computers at chess are long gone. Let alone the super-engines like Rybka or Houdini, the ones that GMs use (on extreme hardware) to prepare for matches. The Elo rating of engines has long since passed the 3260, while even the best (Kasparov at his peak) never breached 2860; a 400 Elo rating difference is more or less insurmountable (that rating difference means that statistically, you'll eke out a draw every hundred games, and lose the other ninety-nine).

Don't get me wrong, I think Carlsen will become the greatest human to ever play the game, but chess engines have become (conservatively) over a million times more powerful since the landmark victory of Deep Blue against Kasparov, if you combine hardware and software advances. What then shocked the world is nowadays commonplace.

Re:Big deal. (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071955)

No, he's not. Give Fritz a powerful enough CPU and 8GB of RAM to hold opening/endgame tables, and it could beat any human player. The days where humans could beat computers at chess are long gone. Let alone the super-engines like Rybka or Houdini, the ones that GMs use (on extreme hardware) to prepare for matches. The Elo rating of engines has long since passed the 3260, while even the best (Kasparov at his peak) never breached 2860; a 400 Elo rating difference is more or less insurmountable (that rating difference means that statistically, you'll eke out a draw every hundred games, and lose the other ninety-nine).

Don't get me wrong, I think Carlsen will become the greatest human to ever play the game, but chess engines have become (conservatively) over a million times more powerful since the landmark victory of Deep Blue against Kasparov, if you combine hardware and software advances. What then shocked the world is nowadays commonplace.

Chess engines are dumb. Without opening books and endgame tables they're worth jack shit.
Now the day someone comes up with a chess engines that doesn't need opening books and endgame tables to beat a human chess player that is a day worth remembering.

Re:Big deal. (5, Insightful)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 8 months ago | (#46071959)

Those chess grandmasters study the same books and tables extensively.

Re:Big deal. (2)

alexandre.oberlin (1125679) | about 8 months ago | (#46072027)

Those chess grandmasters study the same books and tables extensively.

Not while playing.

Re:Big deal. (3, Insightful)

Kuroji (990107) | about 8 months ago | (#46072111)

I guess memory is a foreign concept to you. Tell me, what do you think studying does, exactly?

Re:Big deal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46072125)

So, they forget all those moves they studied as soon as they put down the book?

Re:Big deal. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071867)

2mn? wtf is this unit? microneurons?

Re:Big deal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46072055)

m = milli. Slashdot cannot display the SI symbol for "micro".

Re:Big deal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46072057)

millinanos, stupid.

Re:Big deal. (4, Interesting)

Vlad_the_Inhaler (32958) | about 8 months ago | (#46071843)

It was a Rapid game where Carlsen only had half the time to make his moves than Gates had, but neither had very much time at all. Gates was under no illusions as to his chances either - he considered the result to be a forgone conclusion.

Re:Big deal. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071855)

He lost to someone who spent much of their life practicing the game. That doesn't really mean anything.

No-one (except perhaps his closest worshippers) would have expected Gates to win. But 71 seconds ?? Surely most people who had played chess before could have held out that long.

You chastise Bill for playing quickly...when in reality, he knew his fate before he even touched a single chess piece.

Why is it that you assume speed was a sign of unintelligent game play in his part? What exactly would have been the point of sitting there thinking about it?

It's like standing there on the court taking your time serving a tennis ball to Roger Federer. Speed was realistically the most effective way to him to play this game, for the outcome was already known.

Re:Big deal. (0)

mvar (1386987) | about 8 months ago | (#46071827)

Oh those Slashdot titles never cease to amaze me. He got his ass whipped for good that multibillionaire now, didn't he? I'm pretty sure after losing that match Gates was very depressed during the whole flight in his multimillion dollar jet, while heading for this multimillion dollar mansion -_-

Re:Big deal. (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 8 months ago | (#46071971)

At least in the old Microsoft days I remember Gates having a personality of getting really angry if he was defeated.

He didn't lose. (1)

Etherwalk (681268) | about 8 months ago | (#46072017)

He didn't lose--presumably they both won, just different things. The result was a foregone conclusion, so Gates would not have agreed if he hadn't gotten something else out of it. He presumably accomplished his goal.

Re:Big deal. (1)

rollingcalf (605357) | about 8 months ago | (#46071903)

Of course Gates would be expected to lose, and it would be a shocker if he didn't lose.

But he lost in only 9 moves. He should have been able to last longer than that.

Re:Big deal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46072065)

Of course Gates would be expected to lose, and it would be a shocker if he didn't lose.

But he lost in only 9 moves. He should have been able to last longer than that.

And how do you know that Bill all along...wasn't trying to establish a new world record?

Does he not know hold the record for fastest loss to a grandmaster?

In a sense, a brilliant move. He knew he couldn't "win" any other way.

Re:Big deal. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46072067)

But he lost in only 9 moves. He should have been able to last longer than that.

This remind me of the first time I had sex.

Re:Big deal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071979)

Sure. Then again, dear bill isn't really such a hoot in all fields either. He got lucky and knows how to be ruthless in business. He ended up rich at the cost of quite a few promising enterprises and technologies left burning in the wake of his company. That is also a pretty narrow field, if with a much larger impact on society.

This is easy to forget, but also easy to see if you want to. Just try and read his books, looking for grand insights. I dare you.

So What??? (5, Insightful)

DrNoNo (976214) | about 8 months ago | (#46071701)

The definitive example of 'News' is 'Man bites dog'. If Carlsen had established a business empire to rival Microsoft in 71 seconds, that might be news.

tl;dr (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071705)

Guy who specializes in just one thing better at it than someone who doesn't.

lol (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071709)

Would you rather have the money or the chess skills? You have 71 seconds to decide.

Re:lol (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46072129)

Carlsen earned 800k last november for playing 10 games.

He is a phenomenon though. And of course everybody is poor by Bill's standards.

71 seconds.. (0)

hcs_$reboot (1536101) | about 8 months ago | (#46071711)

Must have been the Scholar's mate [wikipedia.org] (didn't see the video). Meaning even a beginner could beat Gates in 71 seconds. Not to minimize Gates success, but

[he] built a net worth that's in the billions

could he do the same thing today if he was starting from scratch? Make a rather crappy [D]OS for the [at the time] biggest player in the industry [IBM]? Then perform a "IBM gamble" and become a monopoly? Benefit from being underestimated at the time from competition (Sun, Apple, HP) stubbornly keeping selling overpriced hard/software? Doubt that.

Re:71 seconds.. (2)

DarkOx (621550) | about 8 months ago | (#46071731)

Succeeding in business is about being in the right place at the right time. Some do it buy luck others do it by maneuvering into position. Bill did the latter as did Jobs, they had a gift of vision knowing where they needed to be with what product offering. Sure he made some missteps latter but nobody has a perfect record if they play they game for long, overall though it's real clear Bill has a strong business sense, If anyone could do it today, and now that the industry has matured I am not so sure they could, it would be Bill.

Re:71 seconds.. (4, Informative)

Rockoon (1252108) | about 8 months ago | (#46071769)

Modern chess grandmasters frequently play whats called "lightning" or "bullet" chess with a time control of 60 seconds for each player for all of their moves is the entire game. In this time control, a player who uses 71 seconds has already lost on time.

Clearly someone who suggests "scholars mate" here such as yourself would not understand that these GM's actually play extremely strongly even with so little time on the clock. While this speed of chess was popularized by computer interfaces and online chess servers, its actually played OTB as well [youtube.com]

Magnus Carlsen is the highest rated chess player ever. The standard ELO chess rating system is set up such that a +200 point difference in ELO equals a 3:1 advantage (a games score is 1.0 for a win, 0.5 for a draw, or 0.0 for a loss ... 3:1 advantage = 0.75 expected value) His rating is over 2800, so against an average opponent with a 1200 rating his advantage is over 6500:1.

Re:71 seconds.. (1)

pspahn (1175617) | about 8 months ago | (#46071977)

Someone please call this, ahem, "Carlsen" guy, and set up a series of matches against me. It should take no more than 6500 matches, but I WILL become the new chess grand champion!

Re:71 seconds.. (4, Informative)

Vlad_the_Inhaler (32958) | about 8 months ago | (#46071853)

It was not. It was an attack using two knights and the queen, while busily sacrificing material as a smokescreen. Very elegantly done.

71 seconds to heat a cup of water? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071719)

You either have a very big cup or Norway is way colder than I think.

This embarrassing situatiog... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071721)

would never have happened if Bill had spent at least 71 seconds practicing with 'Chess Titans' that comes default with Windows 7.

Get serious Bill! Stop playing Candy Crush!

Bill Gates is stupid (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071725)

"There's no disputing that Bill Gates is blessed with a brilliant mind."

No. He cannot even write simple floodFill function properly.

Re:Bill Gates is stupid (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 8 months ago | (#46072013)

I'm not Bill, but I accept the challenge. :D

I would write a flood fill function like this: take a starting point (from a mouse click, for example). Expand recursively in all directions (pass the image data as a pointer to the children, also pass the color of the starting point pixel) but do not expand if the color is different than the starting point pixel. In every iteration, change the color of the current pixel to the one which we have selected from the palette.

I could whip the Grandmaster... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071735)

If I was a guru at checkers, I could probably whip the Chess Grandmaster in 71 seconds too. Quoting SAT scores and intelligence isn't really relevant. Chess is a learned skill like any other.

chess skill != raw intelligence (5, Insightful)

zachie (2491880) | about 8 months ago | (#46071739)

The most intelligent person in the world would not stand a chance versus an experienced, serious chess aficionado. Being good at chess not only requires raw intelligence, but also strategic and tactical insights that just can't be developed on the fly no matter how intelligent you are, and especially not during a speed chess match.

Reminds me of the story of world-class poker player Tom Dwan (who has won millions at poker and is likely very intelligent) losing > $50k in misjudging his chances of beating chess International Master Greg Shahade [twoplustwo.com] , who was starting the game down a rook (an insurmountable difference when players have remotely similar skill).

Re:chess skill != raw intelligence (1)

Trax3001BBS (2368736) | about 8 months ago | (#46071929)

The most intelligent person in the world would not stand a chance versus an experienced, serious chess aficionado. Being good at chess not only requires raw intelligence, but also strategic and tactical insights that just can't be developed on the fly no matter how intelligent you are, and especially not during a speed chess match.

I've never lost a game of chess (thank you, thank you) but I pick my games as it takes a lot out of me. Forced into a game by the "barracks chess master" I beat em in two games back to back - left em muttering it's not possible and me with a bad headache.

trying to lose? (2)

issicus (2031176) | about 8 months ago | (#46071741)

If you place all of your pieces in the right place you can get out of this TV show quicker .

Re:trying to lose? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 months ago | (#46071803)

My thoughts exactly. Maybe Bill just wanted to get out of this gig as fast as he could.

Re:trying to lose? (1)

Trax3001BBS (2368736) | about 8 months ago | (#46071913)

My thoughts exactly. Maybe Bill just wanted to get out of this gig as fast as he could.

a me too.

"The Justin Bieber of chess" ?! (4, Interesting)

arcade (16638) | about 8 months ago | (#46071743)

I'm sorry, but first off - Magnus Carlsen has been an extremely well known chess player since 2004. Justin Bieber was discovered when? 2008?

Secondly, while Bieber is famous for being famous.. Carlsen is famous for using his brain and becoming the world champion of chess. He built his career around his brain. Yes, some fashion agency also discovered his good looks and started sponsoring him and using him as a model - but that's not his main work. It's a hobby thing on the side. Good for him.

For those slightly interested in chess, but not interested enough to normally follow ratings and such - take a look at: http://2700chess.com/ [2700chess.com] for the up to date live ratings.

Aronian is doing a massive jump these days due to Tata Steel. I'm guessing the next WCC match will be between Carlsen and Aronian. They're typically rather evenly matched.

Re:"The Justin Bieber of chess" ?! (1)

LordLucless (582312) | about 8 months ago | (#46071837)

Bieber is famous for singing. Ok, so I don't particularly enjoy his music, but his fame is at least based on a talent - as opposed to people like Paris Hilton, or Kim Kardashion, who never really showed any particular talent, except for self-promotion.

Re:"The Justin Bieber of chess" ?! (4, Insightful)

James_Duncan8181 (588316) | about 8 months ago | (#46072121)

Sure, although it's worth noting that Bieber is more of a heartthrob that sings. That's not to knock his singing per se, but he's no grand master and certainly wouldn't be globally #1 rated. Just like Hilton, his main skill is being very charismatic in an attention economy and he primarily supplies eyeballs.

Carlsen plays the best chess in the world and happens to be attractive. That's the difference.

Re:"The Justin Bieber of chess" ?! (1)

jez9999 (618189) | about 8 months ago | (#46071897)

Aronian is doing a massive jump these days due to Tata Steel.

Huh? How does a company make the guy better at chess?

Re:"The Justin Bieber of chess" ?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071967)

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing.

Possible explanations:
- Tata Steel is actually a person (like Remington Steel).
- Tata Steel fully sponsors Aronian, allowing him to focus 100% on training to beat high-level opponents;
- Tata Steel pays mid-level opponents to lose to Aronian, thereby artificially building up his rank / score.
- Tata Steel is actually the name of a chess tournament which Aronian won, thereby boosting his rank ('massive jump').

Who knows? I, for one, am certainly not going to bother to RTFA ;-)

Re:"The Justin Bieber of chess" ?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46072023)

There's a chess tournament sponsored by Tata Steel (formerly Corus and before that Hoogovens) in The Netherlands.
I'd imagine that doing well there would have an influence on one's rating.
http://www.tatasteelchess.com

Re:"The Justin Bieber of chess" ?! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46072039)

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=tata+steel

Re:"The Justin Bieber of chess" ?! (1)

geekymachoman (1261484) | about 8 months ago | (#46072009)

You emphasize how this guy made a career out of using his brain. So what ??
Having and/or using a brain is same as having nice voice or being handsome. Something none of us individually wished for. You're born that way - therefore nothing to be proud of.

Your post is assuming that having a brain and building a career out of it is better or more ... whatever .. than people having a nice body/voice .. talent for music.

I know this is a nerd web site.. and nerds are same as other groups of people.. biased, but c'mon. Try a bit harder.

Re:"The Justin Bieber of chess" ?! (1)

rolfwind (528248) | about 8 months ago | (#46072011)

Secondly, while Bieber is famous for being famous.. Carlsen is famous for using his brain and becoming the world champion of chess.

Maybe you are thinking of Paris Hilton or something (and maybe someone will refute me on her, idk), but JB is famous because he has talent, he appeared in youtube vids that had apparently enough draw for multiple people wanting to sign him:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J... [wikipedia.org]

You and I may think his music sucks, I don't think he has the talent near, say, some of the Jacksons at his age, but he's not famous simply for being famous.

News? (1)

rossdee (243626) | about 8 months ago | (#46071759)

Not
and also not stuff that matters

Anyway you don't measure the length of a chess game by time, you measure it by the number of moves

Re:News? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071815)

Melt all the pieces. Mate in one.

He was only whipped? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071761)

I'd like to live just long enough to be there when they cut off the head of Bill Gates and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some software comes with too high a price. I would look up into his lifeless eyes and wave, like this. Can you and your Utilities arrange that for me, Mr Norton?

This just in.... (0)

ConallB (876297) | about 8 months ago | (#46071779)

Guy who is really good at chess beats guy who is really smart with computers at chess....

Next up...

Heart surgeon manages to successfully repair heart problem as opposed to computer expert who lets patient die.

Re:This just in.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071781)

You mean you can't just reboot a patient? Well, fuck me, it works with robots.

Not much of a story ... (1, Insightful)

giorgist (1208992) | about 8 months ago | (#46071783)

Bill Gates is not a polymath, I am sure he is no longer competitive in coding, let alone most tasks requiring intellect only because you need to have the knowledge, the talent and the intellect. Hi might have the second and he probably has the third but he can't make up for the first.

gates (0)

tleaf100 (2020038) | about 8 months ago | (#46071787)

bill gates is meant meant to be inteligent ? i can think of several things that his history would tend to show of himself and inteligence is not one of them.

Annotated game record (4, Informative)

igomaniac (409731) | about 8 months ago | (#46071791)

An annotated game record is available here:

http://en.chessbase.com/post/carlsen-mates-bill-gates-in-79-seconds [chessbase.com]

Re: Annotated game record (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071839)

He totally overlooked that mate lol

Re:Annotated game record (1)

Bomarc (306716) | about 8 months ago | (#46071889)

Mr. Gates did three week... well, one week and two bad moves.
6.0-0 - This move was done WAY to early. For one to castle is (usually) a passive move, which allows your opponent to gain an extra move
8.hxg4 - This is a clear mistake. This opens his right side rank for the queen to enter
9.Kxe5?? - This was the final nail.

IMHO, if Bill hadn't have ... panicked, Carlsen left his King wide open. Also in this game, I noticed that Carlsen seem to oppressive to Bill. Responding to Bill's moves before Bill could even hit the clock.

What if Bill moved the following options:
8. B d3 to e4
- or -
8. Q d1 to e2

Thoughts... comments - other than Bill was destined to loose as he was playing the Chess Champion -- Mr. Gates quote: "The outcome is a foregone conclusion, responded Gates. ?

Carlsen won in 11 sec. It's lightning chess. (1)

bAdministrator (815570) | about 8 months ago | (#46071801)

Not sure if the video plays outside of Norway:
http://tv.nrk.no/serie/skavlan... [tv.nrk.no]

It's about at 54 min. in.

Facts:
- Carlsen was given 30 sec to win.
- Gates humbly said he had a 1600 rating vs someone with 2000 etc.
- Gates was actually a sponsor of Carlsen at the start.
- Carlsen said he violated one of his principles by using a cheap trick to win.

Gates is an idiot, and hates white people (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071807)

"now spends his time on his philanthropic efforts" - which means "pissing away billions of dollars (which he got from the GENERAL PUBLIC, who paid for his products) on useless 'aid' to shitty third world countries, which will NEVER improve, because of the DNA of the third worlders who live there"...

But hey, who needs the truth when we can all live in liberal la-la land, right? Let's not discuss FACTS on Slashdot, such as race and intelligence, because the JEW-TV told you not to!

There's a good goy...

Re:Gates is an idiot, and hates white people (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071927)

The amusing thing is that you think your DNA is better than *anybody's*. You are a stupid cunt, and white as hell. Funny that

Forget chess for a moment (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071809)

Someone pleaze give this kid some computers with free software problems. Let him solve *real* problems with real-world
implications for a change.

Hurry, before the NSA-people pulls up a van.

Re:Forget chess for a moment (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071829)

Yeah, then we can finally have a GCC that's faster than Clang!

Chess? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071833)

People still play chess?

Re:Chess? (1)

lxs (131946) | about 8 months ago | (#46071915)

The chess franchise is still very successful, but I lost interest after ChessVII - Pawn's Castle. Lame story, too many quicktime events.

post should mention it's a timed game (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071863)

with a total of 2 1/2 minutes on both clocks.

Reminds me (4, Insightful)

dtml-try MyNick (453562) | about 8 months ago | (#46071865)

Reminds me of an old saying:

Every person you meet is always better at something then you are...

Re:Reminds me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071875)

Shake shake shake, shake shake shake
Shake your booty, shake your booty
Oh, shake shake shake, shake shake shake
Shake your booty, shake your booty

Aah, You can, you can do it
Very well
You're the best in the world
I can tell

Dumb moves (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about 8 months ago | (#46071885)

Reading the annotated game, Bill not only had white, but got one ? move and another ?? move. A ? is a blunder and ?? is a really stupid blunder. The ?? move lost him the game. The other player even sacrificed one of his bishops which put the convicted monopolist up on material. He still should have lost, but BG screwed up royally. Can't blame him for being mediocre at chess, though, because that has been regarded for centuries as a good thing.

"[Chess] is certainly a pleasing and ingenious amusement, but it seems to have one defect, which is that it is possible to have too much knowledge of it, so that whoever would excel in the game must give a great deal of time to it, as I believe, and as much study as if he would learn some noble science or perform well anything of importance; and yet in the end, for all his pains, he only knows how to play a game. Thus, I think a very unusual thing happens in this, namely that mediocrity is more to be praised than excellence."
-- Castiglione, The Book of the Courtier, 1528, Book II para. 31, Singleton translation

Microwave induces more entropy in cup of water (1)

Burz (138833) | about 8 months ago | (#46071899)

...than a chess game with Bill Gates, as even a Microsoft Surface tablet will behave in a wildly different manner between the two:

* Surface placed in front of Bill Gates and switched on = Very low levels of molecular, audio and visual excitation

* Microwave loaded with a Surface and switched on = Very high excitation and dynamic visual displays

Not a 4 move checkmate (1)

Trax3001BBS (2368736) | about 8 months ago | (#46071907)

but all of the pieces required were in play - both play horses, hate those people!!!
Can take them just takes longer.

Bill Gates is impressive steal code or whatever he did it. but Chess isn't his game. Leading with a knight sigh was after a quick win but
prevented all his other pieces from moving; able to castle, had em on the run from the start. kinda think e castled to show he knew a bit about chess.

How many Libraries of Congress is that? (4, Funny)

J'raxis (248192) | about 8 months ago | (#46071911)

Regardless, it took 23-year-old Magnus Carlsen, a "grandmaster" Chess player since the age of 13 and new world Chess champion, just 71 seconds to defeat Gates in a friendly game of Chess on a Norwegian television show. It takes longer to heat up a cup of water in the microwave.

Thanks for that helpful comparison---without it, I would have had no clue how long 71 seconds actually is.

71 seconds? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071919)

What kind of shit microwave are you using?

Re:71 seconds? (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 8 months ago | (#46072029)

My ancient Sharp microwave takes 4 minutes to heat a cup of water.

Bill Gates? Brilliant mind? (1)

stevegee58 (1179505) | about 8 months ago | (#46071923)

I don't think so. Sure, he's a smart guy, but 99.999% of his success came from being at the right place at the right time.
i.e. writing DOS just as IBM entered the PC market. The rest is history.

brilliant mind? right place time? dark matters IV (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071945)

like the john gotti of the softwar liesense scams

Re:Bill Gates? Brilliant mind? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071961)

I don't think so. Sure, he's a smart guy, but 99.999% of his success came from being at the right place at the right time.

i.e. writing DOS just as IBM entered the PC market. The rest is history.

Being at the right place at the right time and take advantage of it is not obvious.
In hindsight everything is 20/20 but at the time ?

Re:Bill Gates? Brilliant mind? (1)

qubezz (520511) | about 8 months ago | (#46071963)

They bought MS-DOS and re-sold it to IBM, six years after being in business. Their main product, which Gates wrote and was incredibly involved with, was Basic. They started in the right place, by moving to Albuquerque where the 1975 Altair was made and putting their Basic on it, along with every other microcomputer for a decade. He is a smart person and master code monkey; maybe the next challenge in Gates vs Magnus Carlsen will be an 8086 assembly coding competition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A... [wikipedia.org]

Re:Bill Gates? Brilliant mind? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46072115)

i.e. writing DOS just as IBM entered the PC market. The rest is history.

You don't seem to know the history: he bought QDOS (Quick & Dirty Operating System, renamed to 86-DOS) which was writen by Tim Paterson from SCP (Seattle Computer Products) and renamed it to PC-DOS/MS-DOS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Computer_Products_QDOS [wikipedia.org]

So glad they told me how long 71 seconds was... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46071983)

... with their STUPID example of a cup of water in a microwave. I'm always heating up cups of water in microwaves.

What idiot wrote the summary?

Game on chessgames.com (1)

L. J. Beauregard (111334) | about 8 months ago | (#46071993)

Game on chessgames.com [chessgames.com] .

1. e4 Nc6 2. Nf3 is unusual but not crazy.

2. ... d4 seems suitably aggressive; the black queen backs her pawn up, the white king can't.

3. Bd3? Gates is trying to protect his pawn (and preparing to castle), but ends up blocking in his black bishop; better is 3. d3.

3. ... Nf6

4. exd5? Qxd5 lets the black queen out of her hidey-hole.

5. Nc3 Qh5 White tries to play queen-be-gone, but the queen is happy to be on her way.

6. 0-0? Dude, with the queen sitting on h5? 6. ... Bg4 after the knight on f3.

7. h3 trying bishop-be-gone; perhaps White should have played this instead of castling. 7. ... Ne5 again contending for f3.

8. hxg4 Nfxg4 aiming for h2 while keeping an attack on f3.
The only thing that saves White at this point is 9. Re1 giving the king an escape route and developing the rook. Anything else and, at best, 9. ... Nxf3+ 10. Qxf3 or gxf3 Qh2#. But White played about the worst move he could have made:

9. Nxe5?? Qh2#.

Oh, wow, really? (3, Insightful)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 8 months ago | (#46072037)

Guy who is really really good at chess beats quite smart guy of unknown chess-playing ability at chess.

This is news?

Regardless, it took 23-year-old Magnus Carlsen, a "grandmaster" Chess player since the age of 13 and new world Chess champion, just 71 seconds to defeat Gates in a friendly game of Chess

What do you mean, "regardless"? There's no "regardless" about it. It's like comparing a guy who won a gajillion dollars on a scratchcard to Warren Buffett (except for the fact that you could never get richer than Warren Buffett with any scratchcard). There is no comparison.

Or are we really now meant to re-appraise Bill Gates's intelligence and business acumen in light of this spectacular failure to hold out against a chess grandmaster?

Specialization, basis for civilization (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46072047)

I'm sure I can whip out someone's appendix faster than Mr. Gates or the chess grand-master could. I don't really understand how this is supposed to prove anything though.

Link with video and moves (1)

daffmeister (602502) | about 8 months ago | (#46072053)

http://en.chessbase.com/post/c... [chessbase.com]

If nine moves is in the TL;DR range for you, it was a bishop sacrifice to open up the h-file for a queen and knight attack. Poor Bill missed a mate in one, but I suspect most would do the same under those conditions.

chess? (2, Insightful)

stenvar (2789879) | about 8 months ago | (#46072105)

Chess is a very specialized skill, unrelated to pretty much everything that matters in life. Yeah, it's not surprising that an expert level chess player can win against a business tycoon. He'd probably also win against a Nobel prize winner or mathematician.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?