@delorenflie said in #78:
> but I do have the feeling that this discussion is pointless.
I agree with that, although for different reasons. You claim to know things about ML, but so far I could not tell whether it is more than just a claim. I tried to get you to formulate independent thoughts with my question, but you only aped what was said in the other topic. So I cannot judge if you are qualified for a technical discussion. What I do know is that you are not the type of person to look up the basics on how cheat detection happens on lichess, but instead you approach it as if zero domain specific knowledge is necessary. Which, quite frankly, if you are indeed working in ML, is a very unhealthy attitude that has bitten a lot of ML researches before. The first and most basic step is to know your data.
> Because you are assuming that there absolutely no correlations between some of these other data that you say is used to automatically flag some players and the data that is fed to Kaladin and Irwin. That is likely a WRONG assumption, not only in my experience, but given my own research. if y~f(data fed to the system, data not fed to the system) [...]
Yes, because you lack domain specific knowledge, as above. If you had any idea how tosViolation flags for browser plugin detection versus tosViolation flags for other kind of engine use worked, you might agree with me that those two are almost completely orthogonal. Irwin was to the best of my knowledge never fed data from browser plugin detection for that precise reason. Training a ML system with the data Irwin gets to predict tosViolation flags for browser plugin detection is like training it to predict a coin flip. There was also other data withheld for similar reasons.
> I do not think I am making incorrect assumptions
You are constantly making them, and you do not seem to see any reason to reconsider your assumptions, even when you are told they are wrong. Instead, you prefer to think I am incompetent and do not know what I am talking about. Fair enough.
> I am not sure you are fully being able to pass across to me all you want to say
I am indeed not. The reason is that I cannot pass on all the information I get as a moderator. These things are only discussed openly in restricted access areas of lichess.
> Therefore, what I think we need is a forum specific for these things
Oh, of course we have a forum like that. But we only invite people when we think their expertise would be useful. For the reasons you mentioned, we try to keep trolls and people without the necessary background out of it.
> but I do have the feeling that this discussion is pointless.
I agree with that, although for different reasons. You claim to know things about ML, but so far I could not tell whether it is more than just a claim. I tried to get you to formulate independent thoughts with my question, but you only aped what was said in the other topic. So I cannot judge if you are qualified for a technical discussion. What I do know is that you are not the type of person to look up the basics on how cheat detection happens on lichess, but instead you approach it as if zero domain specific knowledge is necessary. Which, quite frankly, if you are indeed working in ML, is a very unhealthy attitude that has bitten a lot of ML researches before. The first and most basic step is to know your data.
> Because you are assuming that there absolutely no correlations between some of these other data that you say is used to automatically flag some players and the data that is fed to Kaladin and Irwin. That is likely a WRONG assumption, not only in my experience, but given my own research. if y~f(data fed to the system, data not fed to the system) [...]
Yes, because you lack domain specific knowledge, as above. If you had any idea how tosViolation flags for browser plugin detection versus tosViolation flags for other kind of engine use worked, you might agree with me that those two are almost completely orthogonal. Irwin was to the best of my knowledge never fed data from browser plugin detection for that precise reason. Training a ML system with the data Irwin gets to predict tosViolation flags for browser plugin detection is like training it to predict a coin flip. There was also other data withheld for similar reasons.
> I do not think I am making incorrect assumptions
You are constantly making them, and you do not seem to see any reason to reconsider your assumptions, even when you are told they are wrong. Instead, you prefer to think I am incompetent and do not know what I am talking about. Fair enough.
> I am not sure you are fully being able to pass across to me all you want to say
I am indeed not. The reason is that I cannot pass on all the information I get as a moderator. These things are only discussed openly in restricted access areas of lichess.
> Therefore, what I think we need is a forum specific for these things
Oh, of course we have a forum like that. But we only invite people when we think their expertise would be useful. For the reasons you mentioned, we try to keep trolls and people without the necessary background out of it.