Business - Written by Jeff DeChambeau on Monday, June 2, 2008 23:35 - 3 Comments
Somehow I don’t think that this will work
Presenting CrowdChess: an experiment in social intelligence. Here’s how the project is described on its FAQ page:
CrowdChess is a fascinating social platform all about pushing the boundaries of human intelligence. A platform to see what happens when thousands of people from all over the world with diverse ethnical, cultural and educational backgrounds, of different age and social status have a common goal in mind and are working in tandem on solving the same problem together and outsmarting their opponent. Whose strategy, foresight and vision are superior, is the ultimate question.
Players sign up and are randomly assigned to be part of either the white or black team, each player suggests a move, that suggestion counts as a vote. Whichever move has the most votes at the end of the time-limited turn is the team’s move.
This model of collaboration is similar to Digg. I think it’s fundamentally misguided. The Digg model works okay for ‘news’ (unless you’re a huge fan of lolcats and two-year-old memes, then it’s awesome), but it’s not working towards any specific goal, it’s just aggregating what people like at some moment in time. Wikipedia is a prime example of the ‘wisdom of crowds’ but the way that wisdom is made manifest is completely different from a Digg or CrowdChess model. With Wikipedia, anyone can contribute an incremental improvement. Even if their single contribution isn’t all that great, it still pushes the article along in the right direction, and it can be easily undone if it’s less than beneficial.
Digg, and more directly, CrowdChess, are manifestations of the fallacious appeal to popularity. Chess is a game of fantastic complexity and choice, more often than not, the most obvious move is not the best one, instead, you look for a move that (ideally) furthers one or more of your agendas on the way to victory.
CrowdChess completely negates this. The individual players might each be trying to push their own strategies, but unless, by some statistical impossibility, they all share the same strategy, all individual strategies will fail equally to be realized. While it could be argued that even without strategy, if the pool of players on one team agree on the best possible move each time, they’ll likely find themselves victorious, I don’t think that this is a valid objection: if each team is comprised of players from all skill levels, they will at best pick an average move. CrowdChess even goes so far as to restrict the ability of teams that work well together to get even better; they encourage all new players joining the action to join the winning team.

“Decepticons: Missuse technology!”
At any rate, I’m hoping that I’ve sufficiently revealed myself as a chess geek for one blog post. I’m inclined to think that I’m right about this though, as Mashable is reporting that the site is for sale on eBay. At the time of writing, it had no bids.
If you think I’m out of line on this, feel free to challenge me to a game of Yahoo! chess in the comments. Bring some friends if you like.
3 Comments
Ben Letalik
Jeff DeChambeau
Lets rock.
What Men Are involved to order Cialis ?
In 2005, the executives at the Cialis offices came up with a new marketing idea. They decided to send out requests for men willing to try online pharmacy with order cialis, and to then respond to a survey. They wanted to reach men who might not already have used order cialis. They decided to send letters to many in many of the less-developed countries. When the executives first saw the responses come pouring into the company’s main office, they felt excited, and convinced that they had made a wise move. Then as those same executives began to study closely each response, they seemed to suffer a loss of confidence in their marketing expertise. From Russia the executives in the Cialis offices got more than one picture of a ragged-looking sailor. His hair hung limp and long at the sides of his head. He had a long mustache on an hairy face. He did not meet the usual Western standards, standards used to designate a man or woman as “attractive.” The executives in the Cialis’ offices were confused. They had doubts about the chances for men such as those who had responded from Russia to have an chance to test the effectiveness of any ED pill.
The Cialis executives could not envision any woman climbing into bed with one of those Russian sailors. Then, just after the executives had begun to plan how to “relieve” those Russian sailors of their commitment to the planned survey completion, an open book changed their minds. A learner of one executive was attending a cooperation college. A high school student, that attendee of community college classes hoped to speed-up her education by taking those advanced courses. One night that high school female was studying the text from her health class. It was a book written by Dianne Hales. The female high school student had opened the book to a page with pictures of men and women from various cultures. One man strongly resembled the Russian sailors who had sent letter to the Cialis executives.
According to the information provided by Ms. Hales, people in different cultures hold assorted ideas about what makes a man or woman “attractive.” Further information on the same page of Hales’ text implied that the Russian sailor looked “attractive” to many Russian women. The executive and father spoke with his daughter about her text. Finding that she had finished studying that text, and had moved on to the assigned work from another class, the executive and father asked agreement to make a copy of the page that he had been reading. The executive and father found his daughter quite pleased to be of help to her father. He took her textbook and hurried over to the nearest copy store. He made several copies, so that he could share his information with several other executives. The next day all of the tope executives at the company that makes Cialis studied the picture of the supposedly “attractive” Russian sailor. Those executives agreed to move ahead with the original plan-the plan to have men living in various parts of the world test the ED pills to order cialis online.
Business - Oct 5, 2010 12:00 - 0 Comments
DRM and us
More In Business
- Facebook, Facebook, Facebook
- Survey: How are you using Facebook, Twitter, smart phones, and other technology platforms?
- Will Facebook be your CRM provider?
- Wiki Banking
- The importance of being competent
Entertainment - Aug 3, 2010 13:14 - 2 Comments
Want to see the future? Look to the games
More In Entertainment
- Lessons in collaboration from B.B. King’s
- CL!CK – LEGO’s fun social product development platform
- Peer Pressure 2.0: Farmville
- Online gaming more than just fun
- The NFL – The most protective league, attempting to control the uncontrollable
Society - Aug 6, 2010 8:19 - 4 Comments
The Empire strikes a light
More In Society
- Balance: customer receptivity vs. customer revulsion
- The Net Gen: Too plugged-in for parenting?
- Are you addicted to social media?
- The privacy discussion we need to have
- “The Data-Driven Life”: Who’s not interested in discovery?

Coming soon in paperback! Help rename the paperback version of Macrowikinomics and win a one-hour webinar for you and your colleagues with Don Tapscott. Ends 5:00pm ET, August 31.
Jeff,
I respectfully disagree. Chess players are taught to evaluate and analyze a few “candidate” moves before reaching a final decision and will rarely take the time to evaluate crazy off-the-wall moves once the initial moves are proposed. With crowdchess, players will be able to discover and discuss a wide variety of interesting moves he/she may not have ever considered. The greatest game ever played
provides a good example of how far this can go. This was a game done in 1999 that pitted Kasparov against 50,000 players from around the world. Almost 10 years later, I’m sure the results could be even better.
I agree with you in the fact that the site is not currently set up optimally for this procedure. I believe an open forum where users can create threads about moves they are considering would work quite well. After an initial discussion, the moves could be voted on, discussed again and another vote until the crowd’s best move is proposed. The site currently has a lack of this discussion as users can only see the current most popular moves. If this discussion starts occurring, I think the results may astound you.
In addition to being a chess geek, I also play a game called Civilization 4, and it greatly leverages the wisdom of crowds through online forums. Similar to Chess, Civilization is turn based, and is extremely strategic in nature. Many arguments have broken out on the forum about which game is more strategic. Another thread on CivFanatics has one player take feedback from the community after every set of turns to optimize his strategy. Even the simplest things such as the opening move generate pages of discussion. Should crowdchess evolve into something similar to this, I could foresee the crowd defeating a grandmaster one day. If crowdchess continues to gain recognition from sites like the Wall Street Journal it could really explode in popularity. All this being said, the crowd is currently getting destroyed by grandmaster Gawain Jones.
Finally, I would love to play you any time, though I may need around 50,000 friends.