[HN Gopher] When the prison banned board games, we played chess ...
___________________________________________________________________
When the prison banned board games, we played chess in our minds
Author : danso
Score : 173 points
Date : 2021-03-08 12:49 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.themarshallproject.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.themarshallproject.org)
| spaetzleesser wrote:
| There is a book "Schachnovelle" by Stefan Zweig (don't know the
| English title) who starts to play against himself in while in
| prison. Good read.
| techer wrote:
| The Royal Game apparently
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Royal_Game
| faizshah wrote:
| We used to play connect 4 like this in high school, it's
| frustratingly difficult to remember the game state but it's easy
| to play (you just call out the column). You can easily forget the
| board position if you think too long about a move and as the game
| progresses it becomes more difficult to keep track of the game
| state. But it's a lot of fun, I can imagine it becomes a lot
| easier over time especially when they are so experienced in
| chess.
| InitialLastName wrote:
| I had a friend in high school who would play mental chess while
| weight training. He claimed it was good practice for his golf
| game; I think he was just showing off.
| tyingq wrote:
| I'm hoping there's some broad reform coming for jails and prisons
| in the US. Currently, there's no uniformity in the way prisoners
| are treated. It's not unusual, in the US, for a prison to have no
| television, no books, little actually edible food, limited human
| interaction, etc. You can't even write a letter if you don't have
| someone on the outside funding your commissary account.
|
| That setup, of course, just ends up being a gladiator school
| and/or permanent psychosis camp.
| wnevets wrote:
| Reducing privatization of prisons is the first step. Prisons as
| a profit center is just legalized slavery.
| GhostVII wrote:
| Less than 9% of prisoners are in private prisons, so I don't
| think that would make a significant difference. I mean it
| might be a good thing to do, but won't help the vast majority
| of prisoners.
| Gibbon1 wrote:
| Also need to consider the privately owned industrial
| complex built up around prisons. Just like defense
| contractors built up around the military.
| wnevets wrote:
| The "food" providers, communication "providers", the
| companies paying virtually nothing for labor, etc. The
| folks focusing on the raw percentage of prisoners forced
| to stay in private prisons are missing the forest for the
| trees.
| wnevets wrote:
| > so I don't think that would make a significant
| difference.
|
| I think it would make a significant difference to the
| prisoners at these prisons
| GhostVII wrote:
| Sure, but the grandparent was talking about how it's not
| uncommon to have no TV, bad food, etc. in prison. Given
| that private prisons are uncommon, clearly privatization
| isn't the main cause of these problems.
| mc32 wrote:
| The percentage of inmates in private prisons is about 8% of
| the prison pop in the US. New Zealand and Australia top us at
| 11 and 19%.
|
| The issue goes beyond privatization.
| spoonjim wrote:
| I'm of the opinion that you shouldn't send people to jail for
| more than 3 months if they're not going for their entire lives.
| I don't want people coming out of a place like that into my
| suburban neighborhood.
| SilverRed wrote:
| Would that not push for more life sentences? Would you now
| send a rapist to prison for life instead of 10 or so years? 3
| months is far too short.
| stouset wrote:
| I don't think I agree with this, but it has made me think
| about the problem differently.
|
| We don't send somebody to the hospital for "30 days", or "1
| year". We don't do it when putting somebody under the care of
| a psychiatrist either. We deal with the patient until they're
| recovered.
|
| Perhaps this should be the approach we take with prisoners.
| They're in prison until a professional determines they're
| rehabilitated and ready to reintegrate back into the rest of
| society. With--potentially--minimum and maximum durations to
| ensure some safety rails on the system.
|
| I have to admit I don't know what this looks like, and I
| don't mean to gloss over the fact that there are incredibly
| difficult questions this raises that don't have good answers
| (what does it mean for a murderer to be "rehabilitated"?),
| but I do wonder if at least considering the problem from this
| perspective might prove helpful.
| vharuck wrote:
| This is interesting. Is the 3 months number something
| arbitrary? Are there major groups advocating this? Beyond
| limiting the harm if prison, short stints could make gangs
| harder to form in non-lifer prisons.
| irrational wrote:
| Is there a prison review website? Let's say I wanted to get
| sent to the "nicest" prison in the USA (not a white collar
| "tennis-camp" prison). What crime would I need to commit where
| to have the highest chance of getting sent there?
| temp0826 wrote:
| Startup idea- RodIronDoor, GlassDoor for prisons?
| Karunamon wrote:
| Unlikely. Far too many people willingly short-circuit all
| rationality in favor of ineffective, but emotionally-satisfying
| stances like being "tough on crime".
|
| Treating prisoners as crappy as they can get away with is
| usually something in favor of a US politician with any ability
| to do something about it.
| csnover wrote:
| I'm not optimistic about it, but I do wonder if the experience
| of living through a pandemic will give folks a fresh
| perspective on just how rough imprisonment is, and a
| willingness to consider alternatives. If it's torture to be
| stuck in your own home for a year--with your own bed, food,
| schedule, entertainment, family, and hot water--just imagine
| how much worse it must be for someone locked up in a cage for
| decades without even those basic freedoms. If you believe that
| long prison sentencing is a deterrent, and someone told you
| that breaking a law would cause you to have to live another
| year of pandemic life, does that not feel deterrent enough?
| renewiltord wrote:
| Hardly. I will simulate a response to you:
|
| > _I can 't believe you would complain about living IN YOUR
| OWN HOME nice and comfortable while PEOPLE ARE DYING. To
| compare this to prison is an INSULT to OUR HEALTHCARE HEROES.
| We're IN A PANDEMIC_
|
| There are enough loud voices from people with high Right-Wing
| Authoritarian Scores (which isn't a Republican/Democrat axis,
| before you decide I'm being needlessly political) that will
| shout you down.
|
| As a personal test, I am buying GEO and CoreCivic to see how
| much I believe.
| jedimastert wrote:
| Unfortunately a large part of the population is conditioned
| to not see convicts as people, let alone citizens deserving
| of any kind of rights or freedoms
|
| see: The consistent running "joke" throughout American pop
| culture of men getting raped on a regular basis
| Mediterraneo10 wrote:
| Has pandemic lockdown really changed that many people's
| views? In some countries it has become a faux pas to complain
| about lockdown conditions. Often that is because people don't
| want to hear complaining about things we seemingly have
| little control over, but sometimes it is because some people
| honestly don't see any problem with life in lockdown.
|
| For example, when scientific advisors to some governments
| appear in national media and say there could be upsides to
| maintaining social distancing for potentially years into the
| future, and this evokes little popular outcry outside a tiny
| fringe of wacko "great reset"/antivaxxer conspiracy theorists
| on Twitter, then you start to wonder if a lot of the
| population has simply accepted the new normal. That might
| create less sympathy with prisoners, not more.
| dj_mc_merlin wrote:
| Extending COVID restrictions for years into the future
| would cause _huge_ outcry, what are you talking about? I
| would immediately join protests and do everything in my
| power to get the current government out if that happened,
| and I 'm not one for "viva la revolucion!" normally.
| SamBam wrote:
| Really? Because slowly pushing back opening dates and
| such leads people with no specific event to protest
| about.
|
| I have supported 90% of the steps my fairly-restrictive
| government has taken so far, because they are backed by
| science. Would I be happy if they were extended
| indefinitely? Well, no. But, realistically, how would I
| know that was happening?
|
| If schools are not fully-opened next fall I would
| definitely be raising a bit of a ruckus. But if Dr Fauci
| and all the other scientists were saying they really
| couldn't be re-opened because we were in the middle of
| another wave? Well, I'm not anti-science.
|
| You can debate each step, but I really don't think that a
| continual drip-drip of extensions would raise a huge
| outcry at all.
| dj_mc_merlin wrote:
| This is a bit of a Ship of Theseus. When would you know
| they're extending lockdown indefinitely, if they keep
| extending it? Never, but that's besides the point.
|
| Some are already quite annoyed with the extensions. Some
| keep getting more annoyed. Some are becoming accustomed.
| The question really is: what percentage of people will
| adapt, and what percentage will revolt?
|
| Keep in mind that it does not need to a majority of
| people choosing (if choosing is the right word for what
| is more determined by innate personality traits) to
| revolt for it to happen. Even a relatively small
| percentage of sufficiently ravenous people igniting
| trouble is enough to aggravate the situation of the rest,
| causing more economic and social trouble. This would
| further push the society into disarray, and a surefire
| way to induce people to rise up is to create chaos in a
| system (historically, hunger was a good motivator).
|
| My point is, I think you're watching the pot before it
| boils, and declaring it will never boil.
|
| edit: actually, Zeno's paradox might be a better fit here
| Mediterraneo10 wrote:
| We're coming up on a year of restrictions now, and many
| countries simply haven't seen much protest activity.
| Politics in some Asian and European countries is very
| much consensus-based, and if the main parties have
| converged on the idea of maintaining some level of social
| distancing, there isn't much space for the populace to
| voice opposition to that.
|
| Large protests in those countries tend to be unlikely
| because 1) protests have been banned on epidemological
| grounds, and the authorities have made it clear that any
| protest will be swiftly suppressed by the police, and 2)
| QAnon and antivaxxer conspiracy theorists tend to be very
| visible at protests, and normal people are unwilling to
| be associated with that. So, the bulk of the population
| is not going to be willing to go out and protest.
| dj_mc_merlin wrote:
| I live in the Netherlands, and there definitely has been
| a great deal of protesting and general mayhem. More than
| a dozen cities had large protests, vandalism.. we had a
| group chat where people told others about places where
| this was going to happen in my city, in our case to avoid
| them, but for others to coordinate.
|
| Mind you, heavy lockdown measures have only been here for
| a couple of months. I have no doubt if the government
| makes a step towards keeping it for years, the protests
| will reignite.
|
| Regarding 1), that stops absolutely nobody here. The city
| center is bustling with crowds, and protests for other
| issues still happen, there is no "police squashing".
|
| 2), that is a USA-centric view. There is little QAnon
| talk over here.
| Mediterraneo10 wrote:
| A lot of the news coverage of the Netherlands protests
| has been saying that they aren't principled people
| disagreeing with COVID policy, but rather just young and
| marginalized people enjoying a chance to go wild and
| engage in vandalism. (Just like the 2005 French car-
| torchings were only very slightly based on minority
| grievances, and otherwise just young people going crazy.)
| Meanwhile, polls show that the Dutch population broadly
| supports the restrictions. As someone there in the
| country, do you feel this is inaccurate?
|
| And no, not an American-centric view. QAnon has become a
| very visible thing in anti-lockdown social media and
| protests here in Eastern Europe.
| dj_mc_merlin wrote:
| The news coverage of "rowdy" protests is always the same:
| "not real protesters, young people going crazy". Mostly
| regurgitations from the police chief and the mayor, who
| obviously have incentive to downplay the intentions of
| the protesters. They are not completely wrong, of course,
| but you should take what they say with a grain of salt.
|
| > As someone there in the country, do you feel this is
| inaccurate?
|
| It's split. Some support the current measures. Some do
| not. Privately, in my own experience, most are much more
| unhappy with the measures than they let on publicly. The
| common phrasing I hear from the hopefuls is "at least it
| might end soon". If it does not, they might have a change
| of mind.
|
| > QAnon has become a very visible thing in anti-lockdown
| social media and protests here in Eastern Europe.
|
| Yes, in Eastern Europe that might be true.. over here, I
| would be hard pressed to find someone who has even heard
| of it.
| csnover wrote:
| Instead of looking for protests, perhaps a better (though
| still imperfect) signal to gauge sentiment about living
| under pandemic restrictions is to look at how much
| vaccine demand there is, and how aggressively some
| governments have acted to ease restrictions. After all,
| there aren't constant protests in prisons, either, and I
| don't think you'll find many people saying they're better
| off imprisoned than they were on the outside. (Yes, there
| are outliers--let's not argue making the exception into
| the rule.)
|
| If most people were truly comfortable with the status
| quo, it seems pretty unlikely to me that there would be
| such overwhelming demand for vaccines, nor does it seem
| like there would be a constant push to (often
| prematurely) end pandemic restrictions in so many areas.
|
| I've been unable to find any poll asking people
| specifically about whether they enjoy the restrictions,
| so I can't give a definitive answer, but the
| preponderance of evidence suggests that if people could
| wave a magic wand and make the pandemic go away tomorrow,
| they would. And that's after only a year of relatively
| minor restrictions on daily life, not 5 or 10 or 50 years
| of being held in captivity.
| dfxm12 wrote:
| Controversies around even the idea of prisoners getting the
| vaccine, as a vulnerable population, seem to suggest the
| perspective will not change, I think:
| https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-
| analysis/blogs/sta...
| meddlepal wrote:
| > I'm hoping there's some broad reform coming for jails and
| prisons in the US.
|
| Doubtful. Prison reform isn't popular at all amongst voting
| blocs that matter to politicians and it's a hard sell to the
| public tuned into a "safety first" and "lock 'em up and throw
| away the key" attitude.
| spoonjim wrote:
| I think suburban America broadly does not want psychopaths
| running around which is what burglars and drug dealers become
| when they spend 10 years in prison.
| kube-system wrote:
| "then they don't deserve being released" -- suburban
| America
| tyingq wrote:
| I say I'm hopeful because there have been meaningful changes
| in bail reform and decriminalizing drug possession recently.
| Some attitudes do seem to be changing.
| everdrive wrote:
| No books seems unusually cruel. And to what possible benefit?
| tyingq wrote:
| To be fair, that's not true everywhere, but it is true in
| many places. Though in some places where it is allowed,
| someone on the outside has to buy it for you. Not everyone
| has someone on the outside.
| yellowapple wrote:
| Yep. It boils down to rehabilitation v. retribution.
| Rehabilitation is effective at preventing recidivism.
| Retribution is politically expedient.
|
| And this goes beyond prisons, too. Kinda hard to _not_ turn to
| crime again if your chances at a career are gated behind
| criminal background checks that you 're destined to fail.
| tyingq wrote:
| _" if your chances at a career are gated behind criminal
| background checks that you're destined to fail"_
|
| That's a great point that I haven't seen discussed in the
| media. When I was young, only "Fortune 500" type companies
| could afford background checks, so you had a fighting chance
| at getting a decent job.
|
| Now, anybody can buy a instant background check online, and
| you can get not just felony data, but misdemeanor data, and
| even "just arrests, not convictions". And it's dirt cheap to
| do so. So, job prospects are dim, and even simple stuff like
| renting an apartment is difficult as well.
| monocasa wrote:
| It'll also show offenses which have been expunged from your
| record.
| tossme1231235 wrote:
| It is discussed in the media pretty often.
|
| By now, it is just accepted that it is terrible, so it is
| less sensational.
|
| Searching 'criminal record employment' in Google News
| yields > 600,000 results.
|
| 'Ban the box' gives millions of results
|
| 'clean slate law' gives > 80k results
| BrandoElFollito wrote:
| This concept of background check on the US is strange.
|
| In France, once you left prison, it means that you have
| served what you had to serve and start again. Nobody can
| check whether you did prison or not.
|
| Some specific jobs require a document stating your
| juridical past but you bring it, this is not some can do on
| their own.
|
| Then you have military and sensitive civil servants jobs
| where this is checked for you, but it is really specific.
|
| I would not be happy if anybody could check my past
| online...
| WrtCdEvrydy wrote:
| So in the US there are rules around court data being
| public so companies scoop up that data and basically
| package it as a background check. This data is also
| enriched with voting data which is also public in most
| states which includes the people living in your home and
| other info. The company ADP which deals with paychecks
| also sells your income information to third parties so
| someone running a basic background check can actually
| know where you live, who you live with and how much you
| make.
|
| Luckily the french did give us a tool to fight against
| this bullshit, it is called the guillotine?
| BrandoElFollito wrote:
| I think a less radical solution would be a bit more of
| "socialism" in the good sense (social protection,
| protection of the job etc.).
|
| It has its pros and cons, but the pros IMO win - bringing
| some peace of mind to people.
| tyingq wrote:
| I'm sure there's more in play, but the concept of "At
| Will Employment" we have in the US creates an environment
| where only very specifically legally defined
| discrimination counts as such (race, gender, etc).
| Outside of that you can fire, or not hire, anyone, for
| any arbitrary reason you want...even for "no reason
| given".
| SilverRed wrote:
| It seems to be the same in Australia from what I can see.
| We have "police checks" where the police certify that you
| have not been involved in any crime specific to the job
| you apply for. So if you have committed fraud, you could
| not get a job at a bank. And if you are a sex offender,
| you could not get a job with kids. But as far as I know,
| a fraud can get a job at a school and a sex offender can
| get a job at a bank and the employer would not know
| anything.
| tyingq wrote:
| That seems quite fair and even practical.
| ravenstine wrote:
| I think you can have a level of both. Obviously we don't want
| crime to be free of consequence, but we also don't want
| inmates to commit crimes again after their sentence(both for
| the sake of others and their own). In the US, we mostly care
| about retribution, even when we _say_ that we want
| reformation. All the time I hear from people about how we
| need to focus on rehabilitation, but then hear a lot of the
| same people shout "lock 'em up!" even for property crimes.
|
| I'm not one to be in the "America is bad at everything" camp,
| but I think one of the most negative aspects of our culture
| is that we act entitled to everything like the world is
| Burger King and we should get everything our way(or your
| money back). Fries too cold? Send 'em back and don't tip the
| server! Someone backed into our rear fender? Sue 'em for all
| they've got! Someone stole your TV? Lock 'em up and throw
| away the key! It all stems from materialism.
| Gibbon1 wrote:
| Years ago I read an interview with a prison warden. The
| interviewer at the end asked him what he would want the
| public to understand. The warden said, I would like the
| public to understand that everyone here is going to get out
| eventually.
| slibhb wrote:
| No it doesn't. It's perfectly fair to be against the lack of
| uniformity in how prisoners are treated without being against
| retributive justice. That prisoners' lives should not depend
| on "the whims of the prison's management" (as another poster
| put it) is just common sense.
| SilasX wrote:
| Well, if you do give them practical job training, another
| voting segment is going to scream bloody murder at "prison
| labor".
| SamBam wrote:
| That sounds like a straw man. There's a big difference
| between practical "practical job training" and "breaking
| rocks."
|
| If the labor is entirely volunteer and something that
| actually requires some training, it's job training. If it's
| forced (which is legal in many states) and it's entirely
| grunt work like janitorial duty or highway cleanup, then
| it's prison labor.
| SilasX wrote:
| It's not a strawman that some people scream bloody murder
| for any use of prison labor.
|
| Bloomberg famously took flak for using paid, voluntary
| prison labor for call centers -- not exactly back-
| breaking labor.
|
| https://theintercept.com/2019/12/24/mike-
| bloomberg-2020-pris...
|
| Just because you're not personally uncharitable enough to
| object to something like that, doesn't man it's not a
| common view.
| tyingq wrote:
| It's not lack of skills that's being cited here. It's being
| unemployed because of your criminal background check.
| SilasX wrote:
| They're not independent. Sufficient skills can overcome
| the stigma of a criminal record. But providing prisoners
| skills usually involves some on-the-job training to be
| useful.
| nashashmi wrote:
| Stories of prison bring up ideas like this. But I don't think
| uniformity in treatment would work.
|
| If a person is in prison for violence then treatment would be
| no more violent games and videos.
|
| If a person was in prison for theft or gambling related, then
| treatment would be prohibiting acts that deal with money or
| games of chance.
|
| If a person was involved in bribery or lying, then treatment
| would be avoiding anything that involves cheats.
| njharman wrote:
| One of the biggest in progress "reforms" is decriminalizing
| marijuana and end of the "war on drugs" in general. Keeping 20%
| of prison population from ever going there.
| paxys wrote:
| Permanent psychosis camp is an apt description. The US makes
| its prisons as hellish as possible - and post-prison life as
| difficult as possible - as a form of punishment, and that
| results in some of the highest rates of recidivism in the
| world.
|
| What's worse is that people get incarcerated for increasingly
| severe crimes. A drug offender spending a stint in prison is
| very likely to go back in for a more violent crime with a few
| years of release.
|
| https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2019/may/3/long-term-re...
| tyingq wrote:
| _" get incarcerated for increasingly severe crimes"_
|
| I'm guessing at least partly due to the "gladiator school"
| aspect.
| wongarsu wrote:
| Even without that it would be a vicious circle. You might
| initially lead a fairly normal life with some "side-hustle"
| to earn a little cash, and go to prison for that. Now when
| you come out you are an ex convict (with barely any assets
| because life in prison is expensive). So you look for a
| space to rent (that takes ex-cons) and a job (that hires
| ex-cons). Chances are you won't find a full-time job, so
| you turn to crime to pay your rent. But now crime turned
| from a side-hustle to a half-time job.
| [deleted]
| caconym_ wrote:
| I broadly agree with you but I think you're ascribing too
| much coherent judicial intention to the way we treat
| prisoners. Sure, people are sent there as punishment, but it
| seems more like the way they're treated once they get there
| is mostly down to profit motive on the part of big prison-
| industrial players who outright run some prisons and provide
| services to most (all?) others, and individual depravity on
| the part of the bullies and sadists who are drawn to working
| in the industry.
|
| Just the fact that I can reasonably call it an "industry"
| should be setting off major alarm bells. Our prison system is
| one of the most terrifying and evil things that exist in the
| real world.
| tyingq wrote:
| That's definitely part of it. The way they suck the
| prisoner's families dry is particularly shitty, for things
| like phone calls, letters (jPay), commissary, charges to
| see the doctor (yes, really), and so on.
| dfxm12 wrote:
| Unfortunately, a judge may get a kickback from a for profit
| prison:
| https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2020-06-23/kids-
| for-....
|
| It doesn't stop there. For profit prisons spend millions of
| dollars lobbying:
| https://www.opensecrets.org/industries./indus.php?ind=G7000
|
| If you want to see intent, follow the money.
| hertzrat wrote:
| The USA would be a different country if it finally got
| around to banning bribery
| tyingq wrote:
| I agree, though sometimes it's not actually bribery. If a
| company, for example, offers inmate telecom services to a
| prison, and offers to do it at "no cost at all to the
| state" or "revenue share", it sounds attractive. Of
| course, that means "exorbitant costs to the prisoner's
| families".
| SamBam wrote:
| Except that when we hear of a for-profit nursing home
| abusing its residents, we are shocked, and set up an
| inquiry, and pass some laws about how people need to be
| treated.
|
| When we hear about how prisoners are treated -- actually we
| hardly ever hear about how prisoners are treated, because
| most people don't care that much.
|
| The way society is ok with the treatment of prisoners is
| the root cause of the way they are treated. Plenty of for-
| profit enterprises exist that aren't allowed to abuse those
| they have power over.
| jMyles wrote:
| The abolitionist movement has been mostly dormant since the
| reconstruction era, but seems to be alive again this past year.
|
| We need to ensure that these dots are connected; prisons are
| not only the moral successor to slavery, but the literal legal
| framework by which it continues.
|
| Strictly speaking, slavery is not against the law in the United
| States; this carve out in the 13th amendment was seized upon
| immediately and remains with us today.
| ROARosen wrote:
| I sometimes wonder, since prison is meant for those who commit
| crimes, so presumably when society decided prison is
| appropriate for certain crimes, didn't that mean automatically
| no social interaction for prisoners, since the ideal society
| would not have (any other) criminals? If yes, that would mean
| solitary confinement is the only real imprisonment.
|
| There are lot's of other ways to take this question with this
| line of reasoning but I'll leave it at this for now.
| tyingq wrote:
| >""alligator" for A, "baseball" for B, "constellation" for C,
| "dinosaur" for D, "elephant" for E and "golf ball" for G.
|
| Shame there wasn't anyone to share "Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta,
| Echo, Foxtrot, Golf, etc" with them. It works well in practice,
| has less syllables, and probably has many in prison that already
| know it.
| air7 wrote:
| On the contrary. It's beautiful to see what people come up with
| when they're not tethered to the norm.
| tyingq wrote:
| Perhaps. "Constellation" is particularly odd to me though.
| There are lots of unique lesser used words with 2 syllables
| instead of 4. So I'm curious why they chose it.
| slingnow wrote:
| Yeah, it's a shame there was no one to share the most well-
| known way to relate words to the alphabet that likely many of
| the guards would already be familiar with.
|
| Had you considered they chose these words for good reason?
| tyingq wrote:
| I am curious, for example, why "Constellation" and not, say,
| "Comet". I've done quite a lot of volunteer work for jails
| and prisons, so yes, I'm dismissive that the guards would
| care about that. The article mentions they are using a
| chessboard, noting moves, etc. Nothing about keeping it
| secret. What was banned was face to face board games in
| common areas.
|
| Issues with guards come from different scenarios than this
| one. The cell areas are typically very loud and chaotic from
| a noise perspective. That's mentioned in the article.
| 83457 wrote:
| I'm sure the words they chose sounded suspicious if heard
| repeatedly but if heard just occasionally they were probably
| less so than words like Delta, Foxtrot, Tango, etc.
| AcerbicZero wrote:
| I've had serious issues with the judicial system in this country
| for years now, but banning board games is just a new level of
| absurd.
|
| How a system so unjust can exist in a modern "democracy" is
| beyond me.
| djrogers wrote:
| Did you read the article? It's a COVID related restriction -
| not a judicial system one.
| olliej wrote:
| That seems like the new "reason" -- at least it's more valid
| than the old reason of "stopping gambling". There was a
| documentary, Netflix maybe?, where guards would routinely do
| sweeps and find any game pieces that prisoners has made -
| paper folded to make dice, notes and score sheets for D&D,
| etc
| hertzrat wrote:
| Let the inmates decide for themselves. I'm sure they've had
| enough "we're doing this for your own good" for a lifetime
| jMyles wrote:
| > It's a COVID related restriction - not a judicial system
| one.
|
| I'm not sure what that means - just that it is an
| administrative restriction rather than something adjudicated
| in a court of law?
|
| This doesn't make it less absurd, and might make it more.
| rabbits77 wrote:
| The guy writing this article killed his dad.
|
| Not really into reading what this sort of monster has to say
| about chess or anything else, do you?
|
| https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/former-san...
| londons_explore wrote:
| Just because someone does something terrible, doesn't mean
| there isn't anything valuable to learn from them.
|
| Don't judge a book by it's cover and all that.
| nkozyra wrote:
| I don't think anyone condones or wants to promote murder, but
| treating humans (even criminals, even terrible, violent
| criminals) as subhuman is the kind of thing that puts us in a
| bad space as a society with regard to criminal justice. See:
| America.
|
| Maybe we think this guy is the most reprehensible person on
| earth. Maybe we think he's irredeemable. But is he so bad that
| we are unwilling to listen to his thoughts on prison
| conditions? Or do we not care because he's a "monster?"
|
| For what other crimes do we now get to completely ignore and
| dismiss the person who committed them?
| thegrimmest wrote:
| Is there no action a person can take before they qualify as
| subhuman? honest question.
| nkozyra wrote:
| In my mind? No.
| the_only_law wrote:
| Given the amount of upvotes and comments, clearly some people
| do.
|
| Amy why not, just because someone did something terrible even
| if you find that irredeemable, do you really believe that
| nothing can be learned from from or their thoughts?
| fastball wrote:
| RTFA everyone. Board games weren't banned out of an abundance of
| malice.
| jMyles wrote:
| No policy is ever enacted in such a way that an abundance of
| malice is the express basis.
|
| This restriction has no basis in science or sense. A
| respiratory pathogen may provide another in a long line of
| childish excuses, but make no mistake: slavery itself is an
| abundance of malice.
| fastball wrote:
| Where did slavery come into this?
| nxpnsv wrote:
| That's inspiring, and also depressing, worth a read though. I
| feel keeping a whole game in your head is a good way to deal
| being locked up,
| myth_drannon wrote:
| Reminds me Natan Sharansky story. Being jailed in Soviet prison,
| in solitary confinement he played chess in his mind.
| https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-25560162
| EliRivers wrote:
| Genuinely thought they were both going to get put in solitary and
| have their sentences extended for engaging in gang activities,
| based on their coded messages to each other. Good God, but I have
| low expectations of this prison system.
| Kharvok wrote:
| Interesting, but the author murdered his father over a minor
| disagreement and stole his car and a large sum of cash.
|
| It does't concern me that he does't have a chess set.
| f1b wrote:
| People here imagine this hard-working professional with good
| intentions to better himself in prison that just was caught
| with marijuana or cocaine a few years ago. They don't realize
| that these are people that would rape their mothers, instead
| they advocate for them to have pleasant conditions.
| ravenstine wrote:
| I think a lot of people here disagree with you, but you
| aren't wrong. This is a fact a lot of people forget when they
| jump to the defense of criminals.
|
| It's also possible to believe that revenge against a criminal
| isn't positive for anyone on its own. There _should_ be
| consequences to crime, especially egregious ones like murder,
| but that doesn 't mean that the victims are better off and it
| doesn't mean we should sadistically torture people who almost
| always have wiring issues that made them prone to committing
| terrible acts. It's essentially saying that we believe that
| criminals are hopeless for reform, which can be true, but
| often times it's not true.
| unethical_ban wrote:
| Prison serves several roles.
|
| Public safety - Keep someone deemed a threat to society away
| from the public until they have served their time, or are
| otherwise deemed safe.
|
| Deterrence to others - Show to other citizens that committing
| a particular crime has punishment, so they will not do the
| same.
|
| Punishment of the offender - Actions have consequences.
|
| Reform - As much as possible, set prisoners up for success if
| they are eventually to be let out. There is a lot more to
| this, but I'll leave it there.
|
| ---
|
| Note how "revenge" and "sadism" are not in that list. How
| does it benefit society, or the prisoners, to remove certain
| social, educational or entertainment activities? Do you think
| someone planning to murder or rape someone will be deterred
| by knowing they won't have chess? Do you think it helps or
| hurts a prisoner's mental health by taking away such simple
| things?
|
| I don't have many answers, but more people need to see prison
| for what it should do for society and the incarcerated,
| rather than wishing for prisoners to get sexually assaulted
| (for example).
| retrac wrote:
| It is beneath me to beat a dog out of spite when it bites me
| because it is sick or was badly trained. Such an act of
| cruelty would say more about me than anything else. I feel
| the same way about such low-life humans, pretty much.
| Barrin92 wrote:
| >People here imagine this hard-working professional with good
| intentions to better himself in prison
|
| I'm under no illusion that a lot of people in prison have
| committed heinous crimes, that doesn't mean they shouldn't be
| treated like a human being. Their punishment is their loss of
| freedom. They still have a need for recreation like everyone
| else, and chess if anything can be a helpful tool in
| hopefully improving their mental state.
|
| I think the American prison system does very little to
| improve the chances that these people can become better
| citizens and psychologically depriving them of stimulation I
| can only imagine stands in the way of achieving that.
| mod wrote:
| > Their punishment is their loss of freedom.
|
| Like it or not, this is not reality. Reality is that they
| aren't treated like human beings, are deprived recreation,
| are unsafe, are mistreated by staff, etc.
|
| Saying that loss of freedom is their punishment is viewing
| it in the most idealistic way, disconnected from the
| reality of it. Being in the prison system is far worse than
| lack of freedom.
|
| That's why prison reform is so important.
| jjcon wrote:
| > Being in the prison system is far worse than lack of
| freedom. That's why prison reform is so important.
|
| Or maybe that is kinda the point of prison? I'm all for
| nonviolent offenders to go into rehabilitation etc etc...
| but for the violent... prison is supposed to be shit, or
| am I missing something?
| Kronen wrote:
| Yes you are missing your brain
| yellowapple wrote:
| > these are people that would rape their mothers
|
| And you know this how? Further, you know that this
| classification applies to the author how?
|
| God forbid we put some effort into rehabilitation to
| _prevent_ recidivism instead of just retribution for the sake
| of retribution. The guy 's serving a 33 year long sentence.
| That's 33 years isolated from society, and 33 years of lag
| behind said society, resulting in a lifelong disadvantage
| even _without_ considering employers being wholly unwilling
| to hire people with criminal backgrounds. That 's punishment
| enough; if you believe otherwise, then the American prison
| system is clearly failing to do its job.
| Kharvok wrote:
| Do you have any evidence on how prison conditions above the
| level of basic needs affect to recidivism rates for violent
| offenders?
| yellowapple wrote:
| It's hard to say here in the US, since rehabilitation
| over retribution is poorly studied, particularly for
| violent offenders.
|
| As I linked in response to your other comment asking a
| similar question, though, other countries have
| demonstrated quite a bit of success with the approach,
| Norway as one example having a low recidivism rate even
| among violent offenders. The Norwegian socioeconomic
| safety nets certainly help, too; crime in general is a
| function of both mental health and economic standing, so
| public policies aimed at addressing both of those things
| will naturally lead to both fewer incarcerations and
| fewer _re_ incarcerations.
| Kharvok wrote:
| I would be interested in seeing that controlled for IQ.
| I'll check it out
| Afton wrote:
| I do. Why am I wrong to advocate for them having pleasant
| conditions?
| nemothekid wrote:
| People here advocate for them to have pleasant conditions
| because it ultimately produces a society that has less people
| who would rape their own mothers.
|
| It's people like you who are so blinded by your hunger for
| revenge to actually consider solutions that would decrease
| our recidivism rates.
| jjcon wrote:
| Even if that were the case, is outcomes the only thing to
| value here? Revenge for the wronged is a part of the
| justice isn't it?
| yellowapple wrote:
| > is outcomes the only thing to value here?
|
| Yes.
|
| The whole point of a criminal justice system is to reduce
| crime. That definitionally means focusing on making sure
| prison doors ain't revolving. Whether that crime
| reduction meets some individual's arbitrary standards of
| retribution is entirely secondary to that fundamental
| primary objective; revenge for the sake of revenge is not
| justice, but rather the precise opposite.
| jjcon wrote:
| > The whole point of a criminal justice system is to
| reduce crime.
|
| I think the justice system is just what the people think
| it should be... not some unarguable objective goal.
|
| Having said that... people value revenge. If we
| automatically released all killers because we had a drug
| or 10 day program that would 100% prevent reoffence, I
| don't think people would call that justice. Right or
| wrong, I think in most people's eyes justice demands some
| level of revenge if not to a specific person, then to
| society at large.
| landryraccoon wrote:
| Restoration of the wronged is more valuable than revenge
| for the wronged. A rehabilitated prisoner can pay
| restitution, an executed or habitually imprisoned
| criminal can't pay restitution.
| nemothekid wrote:
| > _Revenge for the wronged is a part of the justice isn't
| it?_
|
| No it is not. Revenge is not justice. Human society has
| come a long way from Hammurabi; we got rid of "eye for an
| eye" centuries ago. "An eye for an eye leaves the whole
| world blind" is what is wrong here.
| jjcon wrote:
| Fundamentally though it is not still about some level of
| revenge? Just because we got more sophisticated to take
| into account things like intent doesn't really change the
| math. You've made a nice quote but drawn a distinction
| without drawing a difference
|
| If I steal $2k the punishment is usually still give $2k
| back and then all fees then even some punitive damages...
| nemothekid wrote:
| > _If I steal $2k the punishment is usually still give
| $2k back and then all fees then even some punitive
| damages..._
|
| If I kill your brother, is it proper justice for you to
| kill my brother?
|
| Many crimes are irreversible; and revenge only serves to
| make the victimized feel better but ultimately does not
| restore balance. Justifying revenge quickly leads you
| down to inhumane punishments - after all who's to say the
| victim was given their fill of revenge? This is why there
| has always been a philosophical line between justice and
| revenge.
| Kharvok wrote:
| Any evidence this works for violent crimes?
| yellowapple wrote:
| Norway seems to be doing quite alright with this
| approach: https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-48885846
| AcerbicZero wrote:
| It concerns me that he's (or anyone living under the control of
| the state which acts ostensibly on my behalf) not "allowed" to
| have a chess set.
|
| It's possible to separate the individual from the topic you
| know.
| Kharvok wrote:
| It's possible, but I don't think it's pragmatic. I don't
| think the higher tier needs of violent offenders is something
| as a society we need to spend resources on.
| chmod775 wrote:
| What kind of fucked up society are you envisioning?
| Punishment is to be decided by judges, not random
| individuals and private prison companies.
| Jtsummers wrote:
| Unless your alternative is the death penalty or life
| without parole, we had better start thinking about it. One
| day, they will be released and after 10-30 years of
| desocialization we will have to suffer the consequences of
| that treatment. Either by supporting them indefinitely
| through social welfare programs or by the consequence of
| them committing additional crimes due to an inability to
| obtain or maintain a job and reasonable social standing.
| dang wrote:
| This is a generic, indeed a cliche tangent that points straight
| to a dumbed-down, predictable flamewar. Please don't do that on
| HN, regardless of how you feel about criminals.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
| daemoens wrote:
| Not really the point. Also he wasn't the ban was on the entire
| prison with a hundreds or thousands of others.
| [deleted]
| nickelcitymario wrote:
| So being sent to prison isn't sufficient punishment? The
| severity of that punishment should be determined by the whims
| of the prison's management?
| timsayshey wrote:
| I don't know, ask his victim
| kbenson wrote:
| Even were the victim alive, we are not a society that
| encourages the victim to dictate the punishment, nor allow
| the victim to carry out the punishment, so what would the
| victim's thoughts matter?
|
| As much as it's presented otherwise, punishment western
| democracies is first and foremost a method of deterrence
| for the good of all, not for the satisfaction of those
| harmed.
| tenebrisalietum wrote:
| If you are not sentencing someone to life in jail or the
| death penalty, then you can't treat a prisoner bad enough
| to cause lasting damage because they will rejoin society at
| some point.
|
| This is irrespective of the victim's thoughts; if I get
| violently robbed and society + a judge has decided that's
| worth 10 years in jail, then that's what it is.
|
| If you think prisoners deserve absolutely nothing to the
| point of causing psychological or physical harm then you
| are saying the crime they committed is worth life in prison
| or the death penalty.
|
| This is assuming a functioning justice system.
| danShumway wrote:
| You could excuse literally any punishment with that line of
| reasoning. It's nonsensical, designed to appeal to emotion
| instead of presenting a coherent, logical approach to
| sentencing.
|
| At some point we need to think pragmatically about what
| kind of society we want to create, rather than spending all
| of our time worrying about whether or not people are
| getting what they deserve.
| chmod775 wrote:
| > It's nonsensical, designed to appeal to emotion instead
| of presenting a coherent, logical approach to sentencing.
|
| That's the thing though. Sentencing in the US is driven
| by emotions. That's how they like it. That's what they
| _want_.
|
| Nobody cares about what's best for society.
|
| Nobody cares about having five times the recidivism rate
| and the highest prison population in the world.
|
| What they do want is satisfy their base urge for revenge.
| And they're pretty good at that.
|
| Different goals, different outcomes.
| slibhb wrote:
| > At some point we need to think pragmatically about what
| kind of society we want to create, rather than spending
| all of our time worrying about whether or not people are
| getting what they deserve.
|
| To me, these two things are the same.
|
| I want to live in a society where people are held
| responsible for their actions. If they commit a crime,
| they should be punished in proportion to their crime.
| This is a kind of humanism because it respects
| individuals' freedom of choice (i.e. you choose to commit
| a crime...or not).
|
| To be concerned "whether or not people are getting what
| they deserve" is the definition of justice. And it goes
| both ways: if the punishment is too severe, too random,
| or inflicted on the innocent, that is also a problem.
| danShumway wrote:
| Justice can't be separated from rehabilitation. If your
| punishment system predictably increases recidivism rates
| for crimes that have real-world consequences, then you
| basically _are_ punishing innocent people for other
| people 's actions.
|
| Unless you plan to keep every prisoner in prison
| indefinitely, then the state that they are in when they
| leave prison matters. It doesn't just matter for them, it
| also matters for everybody else who lives alongside them
| in the future -- people who don't deserve to live in a
| worse, more dangerous society just because we determined
| that somebody else completely unrelated to them didn't
| suffer enough yet.
|
| Prisoners who leave prison without being properly
| rehabilitated are a liability and a risk for everyone
| else outside of prison -- and even if you don't care
| about the prisoners, you should at least care about the
| other citizens who live around them.
| slibhb wrote:
| > Justice can't be separated from rehabilitation. If your
| punishment system predictably increases recidivism rates
| for crimes that have real-world consequences, then you
| basically are punishing innocent people for other
| people's actions.
|
| If we grant humans responsibility then this is not true.
| If we jail someone for knocking over a liquor store and
| then he gets out 5 years later and kills an old lady, the
| responsibility for those crimes is _his_. Not
| "society's," not "the criminal justice system's," only
| his.
|
| My argument is that humans can make choices and therefore
| we are responsible for our actions. You argument is that
| humans cannot make choices, we are rag dolls tossed
| around by fate (or whichever system you feel like
| attacking).
|
| > Unless you plan to keep every prisoner in prison
| indefinitely, then the state that they are when they
| leave prison matters. It doesn't just matter for them, it
| also matters for everybody else who lives alongside them
| in the future -- people who don't deserve to live in a
| worse, more dangerous society just because we determined
| that somebody else completely unrelated to them didn't
| suffer enough yet.
|
| > Prisoners who leave prison without being properly
| rehabilitated are a liability and a risk for everyone
| else outside of prison -- and even if you don't care
| about the prisoners, you should at least care about the
| other citizens who live around them.
|
| Talking about "prisoners who haven't been properly
| rehabilitated" makes my skin crawl. Criminals are human
| beings and you don't have a right to mold them according
| to your whims just because they broke the law. You only
| have a right to punish them in proportion to their crime,
| nothing more or less.
|
| You believe that through empirical and rational reasoning
| you can "rehabilitate" criminals in order to reduce
| crime. I don't think this is true. I think your
| perspective is driven by emotion, a distaste for
| punishment, and a sense that the downtrodden are always
| right. But even if it is true, I'm against it on
| humanistic grounds.
|
| A society where criminals are punished proportionally to
| their crimes is an end in itself.
| nickelcitymario wrote:
| It's not about him. It's about us, as a society. When we
| imprison someone, we take ownership and responsibility for
| their well-being.
|
| To be clear, we can decide, as the responsibility holders
| over their well-being, that we believe they should be
| treated like garbage. Right or wrong, we have that ability
| and there is no higher authority than society itself to
| determine if that's right or wrong.
|
| Although I have a strong opinion about what is or isn't an
| appropriate punishment, we absolutely should not be basing
| our decisions on the feelings of the victim. Putting aside
| that the victim is dead and can't express how they feel
| about it, this is no way to run a law-based society.
|
| If I commit a crime, and someone else commits an identical
| crime, surely we can agree that the punishment -- whatever
| it may be -- should be the same (or at least equivalent).
| It shouldn't vary based on who the victim is or how the
| victim may feel about it.
| nickysielicki wrote:
| Not having access to entertainment is not cruel or unusual.
| mywittyname wrote:
| It's pretty cruel to allow a person's mind to decay due to
| lack of stimulus. Prisoners need something to do. Books and
| board games are cheap and keep people occupied.
| retrac wrote:
| Not having access to adequate forms of mental stimulation
| and activities for normal socialization, however, can reach
| the standard of torture, before long. Ramp it up enough,
| and eventually you're inflicting irreversible brain damage.
| fastball wrote:
| This is true, though the idea that board games in
| particular are somehow required for this is a bit
| ludicrous.
| nickelcitymario wrote:
| Whether it's either cruel or unusual is a subjective
| question.
|
| What I asked was whether it's ok for a prisoner's quality
| of life to be determined by the whims of the prison. I'm of
| the opinion that whatever the right quality of life is, it
| should be consistent across the board. If I commit a
| federal crime, the punishment shouldn't vary based on which
| prison I get sent to.
|
| In other words, if you think it's perfectly reasonable for,
| say, a murderer to be placed in extended isolation (as an
| example), then that should be applied evenly to all
| murderers.
|
| Surely we agree on that much? Or do you believe being a
| criminal means you should be subject to arbitrary
| punishments at the whims of your captors?
| tyingq wrote:
| _" Not having access to entertainment is not cruel or
| unusual"_
|
| Do you mean by some legal definition, psychological, or
| personal opinion?
|
| Personally, I don't see how spending most of your day in a
| cell without a book or game, for years, wouldn't result in
| severe psychological damage. Damage that might have
| consequences for others once you're eventually released.
| kevmo314 wrote:
| The point of the article isn't that he should have a chess set.
| jjcon wrote:
| Yeah I'm typically one to evaluate people on their ideas
| despite any shit in their past but... cold blooded murder is
| probably where I draw a line
| szhu wrote:
| He's writing about how no one in the prison has a chess set.
| Why are you focusing on him if you care about him so little?
| cletus wrote:
| To me the state of US prisons reveals a really dark aspect to US
| culture and that is there's a real penchant for... cruelty. Like
| here's just a partial list of major problems just off the top of
| my head:
|
| - The essentially institutionalized use of rape as a means of
| controlling inmates;
|
| - Ridiculously long sentences for relatively minor offences as
| just another casualty of the disastrous war on drugs;
|
| - commissaries as a profit center with ridiculously marked up
| prices;
|
| - ridiculous costs for telephone calls as another profit center,
| making it more difficult for inmates to maintain social ties to
| family;
|
| - prisoners count as citizens but can't vote. Also prisons are
| jobs. This makes prisons the perfect tool for gerrymandering and
| pork barreling;
|
| - being charged (not convicted but _charged) with a felony while
| on parole violates your parole and can send you back to prison to
| serve the remainder of your sentence. I don't know how this
| passes the due process test;
|
| - Overcharging to force plea deals;
|
| - Paying prisoners <5c/hour;
|
| - Forcing prisoners to pay a co-pay to see a doctor. $2-5 might
| not sound like much but it is at 5c/hour;
|
| - Female prisoners may need to see a doctor to get adequate
| tampons or sanitary napkins. See above for why that's a problem;
|
| - 5c/hour incentivized individuals and private companies to use
| prison labour to undercut real competitors;
|
| - You don't really have a choice: working is typically mandatory;
|
| - Prison food. 'Nuff said.
|
| - The "are you a felon?" scarlet letter you'll carry for the rest
| of your life. This actually causes problems even for the ultra-
| rich. As one example, it has caused real problems for Mark
| Wahlberg, such that at one point he sought a pardon from the
| Massachussetts governor for what was a fairly vicious assault
| when he was young. That effort failed. I absolutely oppposed the
| Wahlberg pardon. He shouldn't get an exemption. Reform this
| stupid system instead;
|
| - Early release prisoners having to pay for their own drug tests
| where they have huge problems even finding a job as a felon in
| the first place;
|
| - Disenfranchising felons in fairly stupid ways that are clearly
| a form of voter suppression ie they can't vote for really no good
| reason;
|
| - Overcrowding;
|
| - Privatizing of prisons;
|
| - Having a delay between parole being granted and the prisoner
| being released. This is so dumb. This allows other prisoners to
| "tax" the parolee as any infraction during that period may
| violate their conditions of release. In comparison I saw a show
| about a prison in Mexico where a prisoner was called intot he
| warden's office, told he'd been freed and he was immediately free
| to go (probably for this "taxing" reason). I was honestly
| surprised at how humane Mexican prisons seemed in this show
| (compared to their US equivalents);
|
| I don't think it's an understatement to call the US prison system
| to be a humanitarian crisis and a blight on the soul of the
| country.
| facesonflags wrote:
| Perhaps presenting the for-profit system with more profitable
| uses for the space is the way out, for better or worse. For
| example, Louisiana has filled empty space with ICE detainees at
| a higher rate per resident. Something to take into account with
| reform.
| ravenstine wrote:
| You had so many more points to make, but your first one stuck
| out to me:
|
| > - The essentially institutionalized use of rape as a means of
| controlling inmates;
|
| It's super messed up that, although we make a big deal about
| rape in our culture, when it comes to someone going to prison,
| even for nonviolent offenses in some cases, it's socially
| acceptable to joke about men being anally raped in prison. I
| suppose there are some especially bad people whom I'd care less
| about being raped, honestly, but I think it's kind of sick to
| wish that upon someone. In some ways it's worse than admitting
| to wanting someone dead because it's intended to be especially
| sadistic and humiliating. It's sexist as well; just imagine the
| kind of response someone would get if they joked about a woman
| getting raped in prison. If you're a man, Americans believe you
| deserve to get raped if you commit a crime, or are at least
| callously indifferent to it.
| qwerty456127 wrote:
| A common advice is to avoid playing anything in prison. You will
| always be forced to pay something if you loose (and you probably
| will loose because people don't play fair there) even if you
| didn't intend to bet.
| hutzlibu wrote:
| A more common advice is to avoid prison in the first place. And
| if you are there ... I believe prison culture has differences,
| just like on the outside world.
| williesleg wrote:
| When are we going to put crooks in jail and get the innocents
| out?
| ArneVogel wrote:
| If anybody wants to play chess in their minds, Lichess has a
| option to turn the pieces invisible [1]. It's not quite as hard
| as playing by voice as you have the move list you can refer to
| but it's a start.
|
| [1] https://lichess.org/account/preferences/game-display bottom
| of the page
| Buttons840 wrote:
| There is also an option to have the computer read moves to you
| and you can make moves and query the state of the board by
| typing commands. Streamers use this to play blindfolded, while
| the stream shows the board position normally to viewers.
| binarymax wrote:
| This is really going to help Wally's quest to GM. Playing
| blindfolded is one of the best training tools in the box. They'll
| get better at being able to see deeper and deeper without needing
| to touch the pieces on the board.
| jeremyjh wrote:
| "Becoming a GM" only seems possible for people who reached
| master strength by their early teens. Some people have attained
| GM later in life, 30s, 40s and even older - but _all_ GMs have
| been child prodigies and most - if not all - attain
| International Master in their teens or early twenties.
| bsder wrote:
| > "Becoming a GM" only seems possible for people who reached
| master strength by their early teens.
|
| Mostly, I think, because becoming a GM is a full-time job
| _and_ you don 't earn any money while doing it.
|
| You need to go to a lot of tournaments around the world,
| continuously study to get prepared for opponents, and have
| enough money to fund it all.
|
| So, you _really_ have to want it as an adult _and_ have
| nothing else that you would prefer to do.
| icelancer wrote:
| It's plenty possible, but few have the desire to put in that
| much work as they get older. There are people who play at
| near-GM-level strength in tournaments reflected in their
| single tournament evaluations, but don't play enough to
| obtain 2500+ rating or score enough GM norms in major
| tournaments.
|
| There's a even a guy from Russia who is 2550ish rating and
| isn't even an IM because he hasn't scored enough norms, and
| is 3000+ bullet/blitz on Chesscom, which is incredibly elite.
|
| Someone picking up chess at age 25 could certainly become a
| GM. They just usually don't have the desire for it.
| lambda_obrien wrote:
| That's kinda true for most things in competitive arenas,
| right? Sports, chess, e gaming, etc. I hate it, but at mid
| life I'm way slower thinking than I was 20 years ago, there's
| no chance I could compete with young people on raw talent in
| many areas, I might win some online games because of superior
| strategy, but I'll never have the speed to beat young,
| experienced gamers.
| SamBam wrote:
| It's certainly rare, but it's not unheard of.
|
| Mikhail Chigorin apparently learned the rules of chess at 16,
| but only really started playing at 27.
|
| Gersz Salwe started playing around age 20, and apparently
| entered his first tournament at 36.
|
| And in terms of blooming late, Oscar Shapiro and Bernard
| Friend became GMs in their 70s.
|
| (Also, I don't see it stated anywhere that the prisoner was
| _not_ an exceptionally-talented youth.)
| fogof wrote:
| Chigorin and Salwe were both born in the mid-1800s. With
| the prevalence of chess computers for training and
| studying, the amount of strength you need to play at a top
| level is much higher these days.
| Lio wrote:
| This reminds me of this story of a man who played mental chess in
| a soviet gulag to stay sane.
|
| https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25560162
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-03-08 23:00 UTC)