I disagree. The mathematical value of a piece that's not on the board (during a game) is the opposite of it's mathematical value while on the board.
Queen on the board = 9 pawns Queen off the board = -9 pawns
I guess one way to contradict my own argument might be that the value of the queen off the board is actually zero... but that it leaves the overall value of the the side playing that queen 9 less (or -9).
That would mean that you look at the board with no pieces as being worth -78 pawns (kings having no pawn equivalent).
From a mathematical perspective, it seems the board should exist with a value of zero. Which would mean it's worth nothing without pieces on it. Each piece then adds its respective value to the board... and each piece that's removed removes its respective value from the board.
"It’s kind of like Hurley from LOST. Yes, he was a millionaire, but since his money was not with him on the island, did the money have any value to him? Hurley tried telling people his background, but he got no respect. The money was worthless. Zero points."
Seems to me that not having his money with him does indeed have a value, b/c having the money has a value. There has to be a reciprocal.
Having the money is worth 'x' Not having the money is worth the opposite or 1/x.
So by this proof, anything deemed to have value in a given circumstance will have the reciprocal value in the opposite circumstance, no?
"This is a comment on how a chess piece has no value unless it is in play on the board. If removed from the board, a pawn and a queen are equal, in that neither have any value."
Umm... I'm not so sure that I agree. The value the pieces have ON the board can be said to be derived from the fact that they are not OFF the board. That being said, a queen worth 9 pawns ON the board should be considered to be worth -9 pawns OFF the board.
Yes... sexism is an emotion... just as hatred, disapproval, and elitism are all emotions. You can't be prejudice toward anything without emotion. Irrationality is a byproduct of emotional interference.
I'm not sure I get the joke about Kurt Cobain. Is there an interview somewhere where he expresses a particular disliking for Ukes? I doubt it. Just b/c he wrote angst-riddled teen music doesn't mean he didn't like other types.
Before he died, his plan was to join up with Michael Stipe and record an all acoustic record. Bet you there would have been Ukulele on that.
Fair enough. I have found that I have more fun with the game after a few drinks. I should also point out that some of the videos of kids playing the really really difficult settings for some of the speed metal songs are very impressive.
I've often wondered how they would fair at actually playing the songs on a guitar, b/c at that level they've really accomplished the most difficult parts of playing the quicker more staccato stuff.
I say the very thing you don't like about guitar hero all the time. I have played guitar for over 19 years. I play professionally in 2 touring projects and as a studio musician... and my experience is that guitar hero is harder for me than for people who don't actually play guitar. Here's why I think it is:
As a real musician, I anticipate playing all of the notes of a song. Guitar Hero, especially on the lower level, gives you a very low % of the actual notes to play. So instead of playing the real notes... I have to figure out which ones Guitar Hero wants me to play. It's much like knowing a dance routine and then being asked on the fly to perform only selected parts of that routine.
The game is enjoyable enough, I guess... but I really only do well on the harder settings. Just thought I would add my take on why people who play guitar may complain about guitar hero.
In soviet Russia... lollipop licks you!
Queen on the board = 9 pawns
Queen off the board = -9 pawns
I guess one way to contradict my own argument might be that the value of the queen off the board is actually zero... but that it leaves the overall value of the the side playing that queen 9 less (or -9).
That would mean that you look at the board with no pieces as being worth -78 pawns (kings having no pawn equivalent).
From a mathematical perspective, it seems the board should exist with a value of zero. Which would mean it's worth nothing without pieces on it. Each piece then adds its respective value to the board... and each piece that's removed removes its respective value from the board.
I definitely agree that it's a really neat set. I would love to own one.
One of the things I like about Neatorama is that you can have insightful (albeit sometimes whimsical) discussions over the stories and not get flamed.
Sorry if the math bores you... it's just a silly thing I do :)
Seems to me that not having his money with him does indeed have a value, b/c having the money has a value. There has to be a reciprocal.
Having the money is worth 'x'
Not having the money is worth the opposite or 1/x.
So by this proof, anything deemed to have value in a given circumstance will have the reciprocal value in the opposite circumstance, no?
Umm... I'm not so sure that I agree. The value the pieces have ON the board can be said to be derived from the fact that they are not OFF the board. That being said, a queen worth 9 pawns ON the board should be considered to be worth -9 pawns OFF the board.
Yes... sexism is an emotion... just as hatred, disapproval, and elitism are all emotions. You can't be prejudice toward anything without emotion. Irrationality is a byproduct of emotional interference.
Before he died, his plan was to join up with Michael Stipe and record an all acoustic record. Bet you there would have been Ukulele on that.
The iPhone itself cannot have an emotion as it is an inanimate object.
Secondly:
Finger nails that are of a length such as to prevent you from performing any task are an elected nuisance by the yielder of said nails.
Translated:
If you want your iPhone to work for you, cut your fu#!ing finger nails.
This is the ugly side of human rights over-activism.
A number of nouns verb with an unexpected result.
Fair enough. I have found that I have more fun with the game after a few drinks. I should also point out that some of the videos of kids playing the really really difficult settings for some of the speed metal songs are very impressive.
I've often wondered how they would fair at actually playing the songs on a guitar, b/c at that level they've really accomplished the most difficult parts of playing the quicker more staccato stuff.
I say the very thing you don't like about guitar hero all the time. I have played guitar for over 19 years. I play professionally in 2 touring projects and as a studio musician... and my experience is that guitar hero is harder for me than for people who don't actually play guitar. Here's why I think it is:
As a real musician, I anticipate playing all of the notes of a song. Guitar Hero, especially on the lower level, gives you a very low % of the actual notes to play. So instead of playing the real notes... I have to figure out which ones Guitar Hero wants me to play. It's much like knowing a dance routine and then being asked on the fly to perform only selected parts of that routine.
The game is enjoyable enough, I guess... but I really only do well on the harder settings. Just thought I would add my take on why people who play guitar may complain about guitar hero.
Cheers-
TUCK YOUR THUMB IN WHEN MAKING THE HANDS OF ROCK. It is not rock or cool to make the sign language sign for "I love you"
Generation gaps... geez