[NickC25]

Magnus.

With him being human, there's a 0.00000000000000000000000000000001% chance that he might miss something or miscalculate deep into a game.

With Stockfish, those odds are quite literally 0%.

Magnus could make a mistake. Stockfish is literally programmed to not make a mistake.

[jacquesm]

So you would enjoy playing Magnus more than playing Stockfish. Because it would actually give you a chance. And that's the whole point of playing games: to enjoy them, and to both have a chance at winning, even if that chances is remote. Stockfish takes that joy away. For me, that makes Magnus far superior to Stockfish. If I want to lose a game playing with myself I'll play solitaire. Or better yet, I'll go read a book. But the chance to interact with a human at the peak of their skill would be unbeatable for me in terms of enjoyment, far to be preferred over playing a game with a computer program. Though I can see the satisfaction in programming a computer to be that good, I would not enjoy the game because the other side would not enjoy it either.

[NickC25]

>So you would enjoy playing Magnus more than playing Stockfish.

Oh, no, I wouldn't enjoy playing him more. I'd enjoy playing Stockfish infinitely more because I could learn new strategies from it. Knowing you're going to lose allows you to learn from all moves and all mistakes.

Against Magnus, I'd have no chance. I'm barely over a 2000 rating. Magnus could play with queen odds and drunk off his ass while blindfolded and would wipe the floor with me.