Блог пользователя 123gjweq2

Автор 123gjweq2, 4 недели назад, По-английски

It seems clear that one day, possibly in the near future, tourist won't be the only one at $$$4000+$$$ rating. I think that this raises a bigger issue, though: there are too many LGMs. Of course, this is just an opinion, but I don't think that the word "legendary" should be thrown around this often. For example, wrt chess, Magnus Carlsen and Bobby Fischer are legendary. Hikaru Nakamura is very very good, but he is not legendary. Also, I don't think anyone would consider the current world champion Ding Liren legendary.

To be honest, the only person on cf with true legendary status might be tourist. In fact, we can tell that he is the only legendary one because he has his own rank. If any of the other LGMs were legendary, they would also have their own rank (or something like that to signify true legendary status). So maybe $$$3000-3999$$$ should have a different name.

  • Проголосовать: нравится
  • -88
  • Проголосовать: не нравится

»
4 недели назад, # |
Rev. 2   Проголосовать: нравится +37 Проголосовать: не нравится

When Jiangly gets 4000, we should change his level to Jiangly.

»
4 недели назад, # |
  Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

AI will beat tourist in < 5 years and we will have a rank called GPT.

»
4 недели назад, # |
  Проголосовать: нравится +5 Проголосовать: не нравится

being like top 50 in the whole world in any field is quite legendary in my opinion. Tourist being tourist doesn't make others any worse

  • »
    »
    4 недели назад, # ^ |
    Rev. 2   Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

    It is definitely a remarkable achievement, but at the same time, bigfoot (wiki) is legendary, and he might be an interdimensional creature. I just don't think cf has $$$50$$$ people that are on the same level as bigfoot. Like to be legendary, that is quite a thing to live up to. And also the Loch Ness Monster (wiki) for those who aren't from America.

»
4 недели назад, # |
  Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

I disagree with taking away LGM. Being top-50 on CF is a much harder achievement than being top chess player of all time, seems pretty legendary to me. Chess\go are already algorithmically solved basically, I think that stockfish can consistently crush Carlsen, but for competitive programming top machine intelligence performance is still around 1800-1900, maybe 2100 at best even with more compute and time for reasoning.

  • »
    »
    4 недели назад, # ^ |
      Проголосовать: нравится -18 Проголосовать: не нравится

    I think that the LGM possibility really depends on IQ. For example, if you are like $$$<130$$$ IQ, it is pretty much impossible. But if you are like $$$160$$$ IQ, you might be able to get it in $$$2$$$ years. So it might not be so hard for some people out there. Also, there is only $$$1$$$ top chess player of all time, but there are $$$50$$$ cf users in the top $$$50$$$ so idk if you are pulling my leg or something.

    • »
      »
      »
      4 недели назад, # ^ |
        Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

      what''s your iq?

    • »
      »
      »
      4 недели назад, # ^ |
        Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

      there is only 1 top chess player of all time, but there are 50 cf users in the top 50

      Yes, but competitive programming is may more complex than chess. There are other mind sports but we are not taking them into consideration at this point. Like sure, there are probably some "legendary" Jeopardy players out there but they'll get destroyed by gpt-4o, so it's not that legendary tbh. Same with chess, considering an opensource engine can destroy the best player of all time.

      • »
        »
        »
        »
        4 недели назад, # ^ |
        Rev. 2   Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

        I honestly don't know about using AI to measure the legendary-ness of top competitors in mind sports. For example, while it might not seem like it, I'd bet that top Jeopardy players have similar IQs to top cf players (maybe even higher, just cuz general knowledge is so g-loaded). I'd have to say that what Ken Jennings achieved is higher than LGM on cf. But, ofc, you don't have to agree. And it is true that AI would probably destroy Jeopardy contestants atp.