Check out Atomic Chess, our featured variant for November, 2024.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Single Comment

ChatGPT[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
Greg Strong wrote on Sat, Jan 14, 2023 10:15 PM UTC:

ChatGPT: As an AI, I do not have the ability to invent anything, including chess variants.

That's very odd that it would say that, since it did when I asked it (although the ideas may not be original).  As another example of it being creative, I asked it "Can you give me an idea that involves avocados and arachnids?"  It replied:

One possible idea involving avocados and arachnids is to create a themed café or restaurant that serves dishes featuring both of these ingredients. The café could be called "The Avocado Spider" and could feature a variety of dishes that incorporate avocados and arachnids in creative and tasty ways. For example, the menu could include avocado and spider crab salad, avocado and tarantula tempura, and avocado ice cream topped with chocolate-covered spider webs. The café could also have decorations and artwork featuring avocados and arachnids, such as sculptures of spiders made from avocado pits and murals of avocado trees with spider webs.

Unfortunately, I've been unable to connect so far. I can't go farther than checking I'm not a robot. After, it is not responding.

Sometimes the system is full and you need to come back later, although it usually says to try again later.

'Another variant could be to allow pawns to move diagonally when capturing, but not when moving normally.'

This seems to be just FIDE pawns, perhaps - is there a typo/omission?

That is my impression also.  There is no typo - sometimes ChatGPT is just wrong.  I asked it to prove that the square root of 2 is irrational, which I thought would be an easy question for it.  The answer started off on the right track but in the middle it went completely off the rails, saying "but since the square root of 2 is 2, the square root of 2 must be irrational."  (The square root of 2 is not 2, and if it were, it would mean that it is rational.)