Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
User avatar
John Upham
Posts: 7179
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.

Re: Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Post by John Upham » Sat Mar 12, 2016 11:34 pm

In order for the "alleged" (in the style of HIGNFY) attack claim to have any merit I would like to see meaningful graphs with both the abscissa and ordinate clearly labelled.

We need to see representations of:

Unique request IP addresses vs time

I would like to see output from a % netstat -na command issued at regular intervals

An analysis of IP addresses and packet size will provide clues. Vague waffling about "data requests" does not cut the mustard.

Any competent Unix / Linux administrator will have many tools at their disposal to block the requesting IPs etc.
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess :D

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun Mar 13, 2016 12:06 am

Jonathan Bryant wrote: Two days ago Dylan McClain threatened EC Forum members that they might be sued and could well "lose everything" just for discussing a game in progress.
I interpreted it as the more "moderate" threat that Agon would complain about those who would discuss games in progress with the sanction that they were removed from membership of the ecforum. But if you want to rattle their cage, be my guest.

Andrew Bak
Posts: 835
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 11:48 am
Location: Bradford

Re: Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Post by Andrew Bak » Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:16 am

How does forcing people to log in to the website help to spread the interest of chess among casual fans?

It put me off watching the official feed and I'm already very interested in chess.

Jonathan Bryant
Posts: 3452
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Post by Jonathan Bryant » Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:23 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Jonathan Bryant wrote: Two days ago Dylan McClain threatened EC Forum members that they might be sued and could well "lose everything" just for discussing a game in progress.
I interpreted it as the more "moderate" threat that Agon would complain about those who would discuss games in progress with the sanction that they were removed from membership of the ecforum.

Well I like the forum, Roger, but interpreting being "removed from membership" as equivalent to losing "everything" is a bit thin in my eyes.

User avatar
Carl Hibbard
Posts: 6028
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
Location: Evesham

Re: Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Post by Carl Hibbard » Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:30 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Jonathan Bryant wrote: Two days ago Dylan McClain threatened EC Forum members that they might be sued and could well "lose everything" just for discussing a game in progress.
I interpreted it as the more "moderate" threat that Agon would complain about those who would discuss games in progress with the sanction that they were removed from membership of the ecforum. But if you want to rattle their cage, be my guest.
How would they be removed in that scenario?
Cheers
Carl Hibbard

Chris Rice
Posts: 3417
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am

Re: Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Post by Chris Rice » Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:30 am

Andrew Bak wrote:How does forcing people to log in to the website help to spread the interest of chess among casual fans?

It put me off watching the official feed and I'm already very interested in chess.
Agreed there seems to be a lack of respect for the real chess players that AGON are pretending they are acting in the best interests of. When we don't agree with their arguments they insult us or marginalising us by pretending that we are part of a small majority. If they are genuinely prepared to engage in a meaningful discussion this has to work both ways and they have to listen and not dictate that somehow we are destroying professional chess if we don't go along with their demands.

In fairness to AGON though there is something that is bothering me a bit. Chess 24 and ChessBomb are portraying themselves as some sort of Robin Hood figures I guess. Now when AGON produced the pgns yesterday I put them up in the other thread. It cost me nothing. When I tried to download the pgns from Chess24 and ChessBomb though they wouldn't let me do it unless I signed up for membership. Chess24 for example wanted $9.99 a month as a Premium Member. Is it me or is their an element of hypocrisy here?

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:47 am

Chris Rice wrote:When I tried to download the pgns from Chess24 and ChessBomb though they wouldn't let me do it unless I signed up for membership.

On chessbomb, you can just copy and paste the moves. It's the most convenient way of doing it for posting games on this forum. If you use a file, you have to open the file to get the moves in a form that can be pasted.

Being just text, the pgn format is flexible and all the usual methods of creating and moving data will work.

NickFaulks
Posts: 8453
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Post by NickFaulks » Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:48 am

Chris Rice wrote:Chess 24 and ChessBomb are portraying themselves as some sort of Robin Hood figures I guess.
That's not the way I see it, they're just providing a useful and perfectly legal service. There is a free version and a premium version. If you can get the benefits of the premium version elsewhere, and free, then I'm sure nobody wants to stop you.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.

Andrew Murray-Watson
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 5:12 pm

Re: Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Post by Andrew Murray-Watson » Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:05 am

Angus French wrote:
Matt Fletcher wrote:I don't really know much about how DDOS attacks work - but for anyone that does, given the chart does it seem odd that World Chess first tweeted about the attack at 1:49pm Moscow time?

Image
Well spotted, Matt.

The graph and the accompanying report has the (D)DOS attack beginning at "just after 16.15" - i.e. just after an hour and fifteen minutes' of play. BUT the World Chess twitter feed - https://twitter.com/theworldchess (see in particular https://twitter.com/theworldchess/statu ... 0736937984) - has it starting just *BEFORE* play started.
Yes, there was an earlier probe before the games started which was detected by the server operator. However, it was a significantly lower intensity than later attacks and didn't cause too many problems - although obviously we did tweet about it. Sorry for not mentioning it initially.

Andrew Murray-Watson
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 5:12 pm

Re: Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Post by Andrew Murray-Watson » Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:08 am

David Sedgwick wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote:It must be difficult to play in a tournament where, for all intents and purposes, you're a sideshow to some other issue that has everyone else's attention.
MartinCarpenter wrote:Eh, I'm sure the participants know what matters :)
Alex Holowczak wrote:Let's hope so, but it must be somewhat distracting. They're presumably aware of the kerfuffle.
My feeling, based on having been an arbiter at the London Candidates Tournament 2013, is that an event at this level has an intensity for players and arbiters alike which is quite unlike anything which I have experienced even at other top level tournaments such as the London Chess Classic.

The players will be aware of the issue. They'll be too preoccupied and focused to pay very much attention to it, or to be distracted by it.
Morning everyone. After the last few days, I would be delighted to just talk about the chess if that is what everyone would prefer to do! As far as the players are concerned, they are all happy. Well, after his last game Mr Nakamura is perhaps not exactly thrilled....

Andrew Bak
Posts: 835
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 11:48 am
Location: Bradford

Re: Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Post by Andrew Bak » Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:10 am

Andrew Murray-Watson wrote:After the last few days, I would be delighted to just talk about the chess if that is what everyone would prefer to do!
So would we, but we might get sued...

Jonathan Bryant
Posts: 3452
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Post by Jonathan Bryant » Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:31 am

Andrew Bak wrote:
Andrew Murray-Watson wrote:After the last few days, I would be delighted to just talk about the chess if that is what everyone would prefer to do!
So would we, but we might get sued...

Bravo :-)


Andrew, you’re currently asking us to pretend that World Chess has - until your arrival - been extremely heavy handed (to say the least) with chess fans in general this forum in particular. You might like to address that point at some stage.
Last edited by Jonathan Bryant on Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

NickFaulks
Posts: 8453
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Post by NickFaulks » Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:35 am

Carl Hibbard wrote: How would they be removed in that scenario?
You would remove them, or face extraordinary rendition followed by fifteen years in a gulag.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.

Jonathan Bryant
Posts: 3452
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Post by Jonathan Bryant » Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:36 am

NickFaulks wrote:
Carl Hibbard wrote: How would they be removed in that scenario?
You would remove them, or face extraordinary rendition followed by fifteen years in a gulag.

Don’t exaggerate. According to Peter Doggers’ first round report, people were only being threatened with 10 years in prison.

Mick Norris
Posts: 10329
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

Post by Mick Norris » Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:57 am

Andrew Murray-Watson wrote:Morning everyone. After the last few days, I would be delighted to just talk about the chess if that is what everyone would prefer to do!
No, I want you to answer the question I posed to you yesterday
Any postings on here represent my personal views