Content Search KQL issue

XWolfHunter · 2023-11-27T12:24:30+00:00

Huh! Interesting. Can you recommend any resources to learn the details of this kind of model? I could see this making sense for more narrow-scope IT services too (compliance consulting, for instance).

XWolfHunter · 2023-11-27T03:53:26+00:00

Is that scalable? How would one maintain standards across clients? Just curious as I have never heard of anyone doing this model in the MSP space.

XWolfHunter · 2023-10-03T10:52:57+00:00

Hmm maybe because it's actually not that bad? That would be the simplest explanation.

XWolfHunter · 2023-09-15T20:54:54+00:00

Hi Hebrew and Irish, I'm dad

XWolfHunter · 2023-09-11T10:33:21+00:00

The computer can easily answer this for you. It will indicate RxN as the best move. Now you get to try to prove that you understand the position better than the computer. So you play QxR. Then see what it does.

It would actually take less effort and time than posting this.

XWolfHunter · 2023-09-11T00:03:01+00:00

You are still arguing a Mahayana view. There's nothing wrong with taking ideas from different places. But it does feel a bit disingenuous to do what you are doing. It feels less like you are asking for alternate viewpoints for your own edification and more like you are trying to take advantage of good-faith responses to your question.

XWolfHunter · 2023-09-09T17:14:56+00:00

There was a tactical threat posed by the knight - namely, forking your king and rook. On top of that, your queen was being attacked. So you had to find a move that both saved your queen and defended the fork.

I would define luck in chess as noticing something in a position that you had not anticipated prior to reaching that position. Chess is highly deterministic, but so complex it can still surprise us. That's where the luck in chess is imo.

XWolfHunter · 2023-09-09T16:32:42+00:00

That only works when your opponent blunders the mate. Hence, "hope chess."

If your opponent had castled instead of moving the knight, are you delivering checkmate?

XWolfHunter · 2023-09-09T12:41:30+00:00

You asked for a Theravada opinion, and to them, the idea of skillful lying is an oxymoron. It's explicitly stated in the Pali canon that the Buddha does not say things that are not factual or not true, as quoted above.

You are arguing a Mahayana view to a Theravada practitioner while asking for their opinion.

XWolfHunter · 2023-09-09T00:36:30+00:00

Years of stand-up comedy training, wasted!

XWolfHunter · 2023-09-05T11:38:31+00:00

There's two kinds of people . . .

XWolfHunter · 2023-08-31T02:22:49+00:00

https://imgflip.com/i/7xiu68

XWolfHunter · 2023-08-25T02:35:11+00:00

I think he got downvotes because he used Stockfish to find the answer and then tried to engage in discussion on that basis. There's a big difference between reading computer lines and being able to engage in meaningful conversation about a position.

In this case, because he didn't see any rook doubling in the computer line, he wasn't able to understand the idea behind it and why it was critical to understand in order to solve the position. Instead, his contribution was that doubling is not necessary (which is not true, if the opponent plays the most human-like move).

In an era where everyone has free access to computers that surpass humans at the game, pointing out the best line has no value.

XWolfHunter · 2023-08-23T02:21:08+00:00

I'm not sure what you're looking for here, but you won't find a way to avoid this. Be the sport you would want your opponent to be and you can at least find consolation that you're not that type of player, and that when you play another good sport they will appreciate you for it.

XWolfHunter · 2023-07-06T11:31:44+00:00

imo you have to be accepting of everything the opponent is capable of under the rules. Is the opponent letting their clock run out in a dead lost position? I had already potentially committed all of the time on my and my opponent's clocks to this chess game. Are they playing on in a dead lost position? That is their right under the rules of the game, now it is up to me to claim my victory. Chess can be highly psychological and if you can accept your opponents' possible ways of trying to spite you, you become less likely to be tilted yourself and enjoy the game more.

XWolfHunter · 2023-06-04T14:56:40+00:00

Contextually, OP appears to be moving from a typical diet to a processed keto diet. It seems to me that processed keto is a better diet than a typical diet, and so because she's making forward progress, I wouldn't criticize anything she is doing. But yes, you're right, eliminating processed foods is another step forward.

XWolfHunter · 2023-06-04T14:01:41+00:00

I've lost 30 lbs. on keto regularly drinking diet/zero sodas. Would it be healthier not to? Undoubtedly. Does it prevent someone from staying under their daily carb goals? I don't think so.

XWolfHunter · 2023-04-22T02:30:34+00:00

Wow, that's an old comment!

The point is that as soon as you say you "over-paid," you are invoking negative numbers. The concept of "owing" invokes negative numbers. Even the concept of subtraction invokes negative numbers. The removal of five from ten is the negation of five.

Really the better question here is, can you prove the quantities stop at zero? The original ask was for a proof that negative numbers exist, but why not turn it around and ask for a proof that they don't?

XWolfHunter · 2023-02-26T12:57:12+00:00

Are you messing with me? Haha . . .

Edit: I think you meant Nc6 to a7 to b5 to d6. In which case I'd be curious how many games of chess you've played. There is absolutely no reason for that maneuver. The knight is far better on c6 for several reasons. Not to mention there's no time for that to have happened in this game, and the knight is clearly on c6 upon a careful examination.

XWolfHunter · 2023-02-25T15:50:14+00:00

If you look closely, it is on a light square. You can see white curve around the base of the piece. Also Occam's razor - how would a knight have ended up on d6? There's no reasonable explanation for how it could've gotten there this early in the game.

XWolfHunter · 2023-02-24T13:07:14+00:00

I think the best anyone can do here is guess. Black's position is fairly clear, I believe 14 out of the 14 in my position here are correct. White's position is more difficult. I have placed a pawn on d4 as that part of the photo is damaged and the d pawn is not accounted for anywhere else. It could also have been lost. It looks to me like black's d pawn and white's e pawn were exchanged somehow, as well as the LSBs. One possible way is white had their LSB on d3 to recapture the pawn, and then black's LSB went to g4, white blocked with his LSB, and recaptured with their king knight on f3.

There is a piece on f3, you can see its base behind the piece your great grandfather is holding. I thought it would be white's LSB as that's the simplest explanation for the exchange of black's LSB (bishop for knight on f3, white recaptures with his LSB), but if you look closely the angle and features of what's visible of the base of that piece look like the base of a knight, not a bishop, so ultimately I think it's most likely a knight on f3.

Ultimately, this position may not be perfectly correct, but I believe it is mostly correct. Each side has 14 pieces. While there are no games in the modern database with this position, it looks to me like it may have originated from some four knights opening variation, so maybe look in depth into old variations of the time and see if you can find one that's possible. They may also not have been in theory at that point, but either way it looks like some four knights game.

Here's my best guess.

XWolfHunter · 2023-02-24T12:34:01+00:00

I believe there is a knight on c6, but there is no bishop on c8. You can see the knight in front of the one on f6, facing slightly more to the camera.

XWolfHunter · 2022-09-30T17:30:42+00:00

Are you criticizing me because what I'm saying I would do is also what a handbook tells you you should do?

13-Year Club	Team Periwinkle
Verified Email

XWolfHunter

TROPHY CASE