@davidllada Even if you put yourself into the shoes of Carlsen, there is still 0 justification for what he did at the Sinquefield Cup. If you actually look at the moves, it is very obvious that Niemann didn't cheat in this game.
English
SED
431 posts
SED
@sed13949
I like to discuss philosophy, football, politics, chess and music.
Katılım Haziran 2025
378 Takip Edilen27 Takipçiler
I just watched it. You might have your own sympathies, biases, and even interests in this story and its main characters, but as a journalist, I think the documentary does a brilliant job of presenting the story objectively, giving everyone their share of time to clearly explain their views in a fair way. Yes, all parties involved in this controversy made mistakes, and each of them admits it. I don’t agree that it made “everybody look bad,” as I’ve already read in quite a few posts. It makes the story human. You have to walk in someone’s shoes to judge them, and none of us have been in the of the main characters in this story.
ICC chessclub.com@chessclubICC
If you have already watched the @netflix documentary on the Magnus Carlsen–Hans Niemann controversy (Untold: Chess Mates), share your thoughts in the replies. We will share/retweet the most interesting takes.
English
@SwannMarcus89 If you deem Rogan so dumb that he doesn't count as evil, then surely Piker also qualifies
English
Rogan is very dumb. It’s hard to differentiate between stupidity and evil in his case
English
Okay. Rogan may be evil. It’s just my definition of what constitutes evil has been skewed by the last decade.
Rogan is terrible, but compared to Hasan and Nick Fuentes he’s a fucking saint
Lonnie Luna II@LLunaTrexing
@SwannMarcus89 Oh I def think he's evil: platformed Alex Jones, huge into birther conspiracies, ridiculously racist...hell even basic decency things like living in an anti drug state, taking whatever you want, and never disparaging Abott and co for those policies.
English
@nebulacoffees @SwannMarcus89 Have you heard him talk about social issues?
English
@sed13949 @SwannMarcus89 What is your basis for calling him Right leaning?
I’m genuinely curious in this answer.
English
I agree this is terrible but would also like to point out putting Jackson Hinkel in red is highly debatable, unless the red does not mean “Republican”
Nate Silver@NateSilver538
These are the Twitter/X accounts with the most engagement so far in 2026. I suppose I had some intuition for how bad it was, but jeez, this is what you get when the ecosystem is broken.
English
SED retweetledi
These are the Twitter/X accounts with the most engagement so far in 2026. I suppose I had some intuition for how bad it was, but jeez, this is what you get when the ecosystem is broken.
English
@MatthewJBar @marcusabramovi1 Obviously it would be better if they had a deep understanding, but knowing "buzzwords" such as "Modern institutions are important", "Democracy good" or "The EU brought peace to Europe" is essential to a functioning society. I'll leave it there, as this is going nowhere.
English
@sed13949 @marcusabramovi1 I'd agree with you if most children actually acquired a deep understanding of how nationalism led to conflict. However, at best, they acquire a shallow understanding of trivia: buzzwords, ideologies, countries involved, and major events, and forget most of it by adulthood anyway.
English
There's a strange disconnect in how people talk about school. Most people insist it's very important for kids to stay focused in school and learn the material, yet most adults admit to having forgotten nearly everything they learned in school beyond the basics.
English
@MatthewJBar @marcusabramovi1 @sed13949 No no you're wrong. Random people walking down the street could you give you a deep analysis of Balkan politics in the early 1910s, Russian foreign policy, the German military buildup...
English
@MatthewJBar @marcusabramovi1 To teach children that nationalism is bad and leads to wars seems like a really, really important thing. It is also incredibly important that they know what Europe looked like before the European Union
English
@marcusabramovi1 @sed13949 It's perhaps true that most people could name something like "nationalism" or "Archduke Franz Ferdinand was shot". But even granting that, it seems completely unnecessary to waste hundreds of hours of a child's time to acquire such shallow knowledge.
English
@MatthewJBar @marcusabramovi1 And my point is that the majority of things taught at school are "basic knowledge". We take it for granted that people know these things, but the only reason why they know them is because school exists.
English
@sed13949 Students in all countries retain basic knowledge into adulthood but forget almost all of the specific things they were taught. That was my point.
As @marcusabramovi1 said, I encourage you to test your hypothesis in your daily life.
English
@MatthewJBar I am 100% sure that in the country where I live most people know what event caused World War 1. Not sure about the US whose school system is notoriously terrible. But anyway, I assume you admit that I am correct that the average thing taught in school is more like THAT.
English
@sed13949 I don't think most adults could accurately explain the causes of World War 1 or frankly even write a solid persuasive essay.
English
@MatthewJBar There is no way that you genuinely believe the average thing you learn at school is more like "How do P-waves and S-waves inform us about Earth's internal structure?" than like "What event caused World War 1?" or "How do you write a rhetorically effective essay?"
English
@sed13949 These concepts are routinely taught in high school biology, chemistry, and Earth science courses, though perhaps more in honors and AP courses than the normal ones.
English
@MatthewJBar Lol. As if the majority of things you learn at school are things like THAT. Don't be ridiculous.
English
@sed13949 So, you think most adults remember what distinguishes competitive from noncompetitive enzyme inhibition? Or how a buffer resists pH changes? Or how P-waves and S-waves inform us about Earth's internal structure?
English
@JoePostingg very witty remark, except for the fact that this is the exact opposite of what Christians actually believe
English
@dioscuri @NathanpmYoung But not to nearly the same degree! It does not follow from Bayes' Theorem that if E would be n-amount of evidence for H, that not-E is n-amount of evidence for not-H. In this case, the evidence for the non-racist hypothesis is trivially small
English
@NathanpmYoung Indeed. Having zero friends from a given identity group is (weak, defeasible) evidence of prejudicial attitudes toward that group. By the same likelihood ratio, having friends from that group should update you in the other direction.
English
@Onalenna_SA @EBL2017 If people posted "Arteta needs to go" after a win, you would complain as well
English
I appreciate you.
But come back to me at the end of May.
MACHALA JNR🌍🏅@starboylekzy1
@EBL2017 EBL, i enjoy your analysis , Top Top Top, always, but arteta needs to leave arsenal , the squad needs something fresh. Not being a ruthless team with this man.
English
@YAhbideen Surely you cannot deny that there is a pattern of us failing in our most important games under Arteta
English
Whenever I'm hopeless, I read EBL. Always have a different perspective. I'm not an analyst but I know exactly when not to blame the manager. I blame the players for individual errors and performances.
EBL@EBL2017
I am beyond calm about Arsenal from here until the end of the season. Last night's emotional outburst from the masses was predictable, but also predictably illogical. In moments like this, true analysts comes to the fore and the weak are separated from the chaff. The charlatan's reveal themselves in broad daylight. Unfortunately, they take up 99.9% of the population. Anybody who complained about Arteta's system, the balance, certain players not succeeding because of the coach, or even those complaining about certain individuals not being up to par are almost all completely mistaken. We learnt nothing new about Arsenal last night. Not one thing. From a tactical or player-based point of view. The reality of the situation is that Arsenal came up against the most in-form team in England and played a rotated team due to injuries. This is not an excuse, as Arsenal should still be beating Southampton, but losing to them becomes less of a surprise when considering the context. Arteta's selection was incredibly balanced. I only saw one other analyst on this platform say this, and he is correct. Completely. Yet he is being 'dragged' for it. The first half performance proved that to be entirely correct, too. Arsenal were dominant against a Southampton team who didn't press. However, Southampton did have some moments. Why? Because Mosquera, White, and Gabriel all made unforced individual errors which negatively impacted the flow of the game. That's football, and it can happen, but it certainly happened far too often last night which made the game basketball-y. Then, as the game wore on, Arsenal got weaker due to their injury situation. It was 1-1 at the time and Arsenal had Dowman in the #10 - a role that is instrumental to organising Arsenal's press and exerting control on the game. As good as Dowman is going forwards, his non-existent attempt at a counter-press for the first goal conceded, lack of defensive intensity, and immaturity to organise the press is why he will only be used as a wildcard late on in games against deep-lying defences or when Arsenal need a goal. Right now, he is a total passenger defensively. Then, to make matters worse, Gabriel came off injured and Havertz came off as well (no doubt to manage his load). Arsenal were simply not as well co-ordinated as they typically are defensively as a consequence of these factors all taken together. Arteta picked a rotated team which got weaker as the game went on. The second goal summed up their issues. Southampton kicked long from a goal kick down Mosquera's side, he failed to win the initial aerial duel, and instead of Arsenal having one of Rice, Merino, or Havertz to compete for the second ball on the left, they had Zubimendi, who also failed to win the duel. From here, Southampton scored in transition. Would that have happened if Arsenal didn't have injuries or need to rest Gabriel, Rice, Merino, or Havertz? No. But it did happen, and knockout football is ruthless. One loss and you're out. But does a rotated and injury-hit Arsenal team losing to Southampton mean that the club are in crisis mode? Or that the system is fundamentally broken? Or that there is genuine concern over the Premier League title race or the Champions League situation? Not to any attentive viewer, no, and here's why: In the Carabao Cup final, City surprised Arsenal tactically. Mikel and his staff should have come up with solutions at half-time, but they did not. Players also could have helped on the day, sure, but they suffered too. But, like I said at the time, would Arsenal rather be surprised tactically in the Carabao Cup final or in the league game against City? The answer is so obviously in the cup final. Now, when the league game comes around, Arsenal will be prepared to face that likely City set-up. Trust me on that. Plus, despite losing to Southampton, the balance in the team was excellent. We saw that in the first half. Just because individual errors and a weakened performance as the game went on may skew that notion does not mean that Arteta's system is flawed or that any individuals are not up to par or anything ridiculous like that. Remember, none of Raya, Timber, Saliba, Hincapié, Calafiori, Zubimendi, Rice, Eze, Saka, Trossard, and Gyökeres started. That is quite literally Arsenal's XI outside of Gabriel, and he came off injured too! Realistically, the argument being thrown about regarding the defeat to Southampton is that because Arsenal's second string XI lost, the entire season is in jeopardy. I mean… come on! What a lot of nonsense! Remove emotion from the situation. Zoom out. Realise that Arsenal are 9 points clear in the Premier League with 7 games to play. City have a game in hand, sure, but that game in hand is against Chelsea away. Plus, Arsenal have to play first in the Premier League against Bournemouth at home, giving them the opportunity to extend the lead to 12 points with 6 games to go. Arsenal are also in the quarter finals of the Champions League against Sporting Lisbon. The weakest team left in the competition. If you said this was the situation to any Arsenal fan at the start of the season, they would have bitten your hand off for it, and rightly so. Plus, I don't buy into the notion that Arsenal are in bad form as they enter the business end of the season. What a whole load of contextless nonsense that is. City sprung a tactical surprise in the final. Arsenal will be better prepared for the league game. Plus, against Southampton, Arsenal played their second string XI. They are one off occurrences. The only legitimate concern Arsenal have at this point is their injury situation. The likes of Timber, Gabriel, Hincapié, Rice, Saka, and Trossard are key figures who Arsenal need to be fit and firing to see out the season. Plus, knowing the freakish nature of these guys, I don't expect them to miss too much football from here on out. They are almost all athletic freaks and mental giants. Outside of that, I couldn't be more calm and confident about the situation. Plus, on a personal level, last night revealed that my mission on this platform is far from complete. I still have so much work to do to educate the masses. So, so much work. I feel outnumbered in this moment, but I will not waver. I never have. Not since 2017. And I am not about to start now. Signing out, EBL.
English
@EBL2017 That's the most obvious example of the goomba fallacy I've ever seen. Obviously these are different people: The people who once thought Gyok wasn't good enough still do and everyone who loved Havertz still does, but obviously the pro-Havertz people are less vocal rn
English
Rewind about a month and Havertz was loved, Gyökeres hated.
Now it's the other way around.
In a month from now, it'll likely change again.
Do you realise what's wrong with that? How that way of viewing the world is incredibly reactionary and overly emotional?
Please, wake up.
English
@EbinMemes22 @Rapunzll @waldenpod Maybe it's very slight evidence... but the evidence becomes even smaller when one considers that analytic philosophers are under tremendous pressure to accept physicalism. Many physicalists treat dualists like one would treat flat earthers
English
@Rapunzll @waldenpod just that they originated the idea. presumably they thought about it a lot. it's not a steadfast rule but if the person who proposed it decided it was wrong that's a point against it
English
This is like the 50th time I’ve heard someone convey this information in this way. Why tf do physicalists think an argument becomes unsound when the originator doesn’t accept it any longer?
English