Learn as you teach her
on
Chess for Kids?
·
· Score: 5, Informative
I'm an intermediate chess player, and I'm currently teaching my 9 year old son to play.
You should teach your daughter yourself, rather than look for chess software. She'll be able to ask you questions as you go, and it'll be quality time that you can share with her.
I don't know what your level of chess knowlege is, but you could read some books to pick up the basics of tactics and strategy so that you're prepared to teach her. If you begin by teaching her the mechanics (how the pieces move and capture), by the time she's ready to learn basic tactics (pins, forks) and strategy (control the center), you should know enough about these topics that you'll be able to teach her.
I would recommend two classic books for any beginner to read to pick up the basics:
These are both considered essential reading for anyone interested in grasping the basic concepts of chess. If read these these (or any other) books on chess strategy, you'll be prepared to teach your daughter for at least a couple of years, and you'll improve your chess as well. If you get to the point where you are unable (or unwilling) to continue studying, and your daughter starts beating you regularly, then she will probably be ready to start reading on her own, or you might want to consider a chess coach at that point.
There seem to be two points here that have been covered too many times already.
The first is web site design. Kirk (no relation) complains that you can't scan or skim on news websites, but a lot of sites have designs that approximate this. The Onion has on its front page headlines, and about a paragraph of text. Just go through this page and you're scanning.
The second issue is pay vs advertising. Peoples opinions seem to be divided on this. Everyone curses NY Times online for requiring registration, but several people have already commented on this article saying "I'd gladly pay, just get rid of the ads". Well, you have to have one or the other, and whichever method an online news site chooses, someone's not happy about it.
In any case, these issues have been covered before, and it looks like this is just another blogger making up fluff-filled articles to try to wring out some revenue from his site. I wish this non-news wouldn't make it past the Slashdot editors.
The scientist quoted in the article says: "The kind of spacecraft we've talked about could move an asteroid 650 feet (200 meters) across provided we have decades of advanced warning". 650 feet?
Ah, I think I understand now. I originally thought you were smoking dope, or possibly insane. But in fact, your harsh words appear to be due to the fact that you think I'm American, and my comment was motivated by my political views.
I am, in fact, not American, but German. I have never eaten a Freedom Fry or Freedom Toast. My comment was purely humorous. If Neanderthal artifacts had been found in Italy or Poland, I would have made the same joke about the Italians or Polish. I believe that, if they didn't try to read any political motivation into it, a person in both Yuma, Arizona and Grenoble, France would find this humorous. If you truly resent this joke, I can only conclude that you have no sense of humor.
As for my relationship with my communications officer, I will only say that what we shared was special and tender, and I will not discuss it further.
I don't get it, I thougth prior art prevented you from getting a patent. Why did they still get this patent if there are all these instances of prior art?
Why are you laughing at this? The proposed definition of science is actually quite accurate. Science is a continuing investigation.
Are you implying that you know that evolution is correct, and that therefore we no longer need to investigate other hypothesis?
This reminds me of an episode of "Friends" where Phoebe tells Ross:
"Not so long ago, the brightest minds thought that the world was flat, but we now know that it's round. Are you so arrogant as to suggest that you are so much smarter than they are, that what you believe today can't be disproven in the future?"
I'm probably way off on the quote, but that was the gist of it. I don't see anything wrong with defining science in this way. If you have a problem with it because it allows evolution to be questioned, then you are the one who is being dogmatic and arrogant.
And, yes, I'm secure enough in my intelligence to use a "Friends" quote to defend my definition of science.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm an intermediate chess player, and I'm currently teaching my 9 year old son to play.
You should teach your daughter yourself, rather than look for chess software. She'll be able to ask you questions as you go, and it'll be quality time that you can share with her.
I don't know what your level of chess knowlege is, but you could read some books to pick up the basics of tactics and strategy so that you're prepared to teach her. If you begin by teaching her the mechanics (how the pieces move and capture), by the time she's ready to learn basic tactics (pins, forks) and strategy (control the center), you should know enough about these topics that you'll be able to teach her.
I would recommend two classic books for any beginner to read to pick up the basics:
Chess Fundamentals http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1857440730
Lasker's Manual of Chess http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0486206408
These are both considered essential reading for anyone interested in grasping the basic concepts of chess. If read these these (or any other) books on chess strategy, you'll be prepared to teach your daughter for at least a couple of years, and you'll improve your chess as well. If you get to the point where you are unable (or unwilling) to continue studying, and your daughter starts beating you regularly, then she will probably be ready to start reading on her own, or you might want to consider a chess coach at that point.
There seem to be two points here that have been covered too many times already.
The first is web site design. Kirk (no relation) complains that you can't scan or skim on news websites, but a lot of sites have designs that approximate this. The Onion has on its front page headlines, and about a paragraph of text. Just go through this page and you're scanning.
The second issue is pay vs advertising. Peoples opinions seem to be divided on this. Everyone curses NY Times online for requiring registration, but several people have already commented on this article saying "I'd gladly pay, just get rid of the ads". Well, you have to have one or the other, and whichever method an online news site chooses, someone's not happy about it.
In any case, these issues have been covered before, and it looks like this is just another blogger making up fluff-filled articles to try to wring out some revenue from his site. I wish this non-news wouldn't make it past the Slashdot editors.
The scientist quoted in the article says: "The kind of spacecraft we've talked about could move an asteroid 650 feet (200 meters) across provided we have decades of advanced warning". 650 feet?
Ah, I think I understand now. I originally thought you were smoking dope, or possibly insane. But in fact, your harsh words appear to be due to the fact that you think I'm American, and my comment was motivated by my political views.
I am, in fact, not American, but German. I have never eaten a Freedom Fry or Freedom Toast. My comment was purely humorous. If Neanderthal artifacts had been found in Italy or Poland, I would have made the same joke about the Italians or Polish. I believe that, if they didn't try to read any political motivation into it, a person in both Yuma, Arizona and Grenoble, France would find this humorous. If you truly resent this joke, I can only conclude that you have no sense of humor.
As for my relationship with my communications officer, I will only say that what we shared was special and tender, and I will not discuss it further.
Wow. May I ask you, "friend", what you are smoking?
Yes, it does explain something about myself. I have a sense of humor.
Neanderthals co-existed with anatomically modern humans for at least 1,000 years in central France
That explains a lot about the French.
I don't get it, I thougth prior art prevented you from getting a patent. Why did they still get this patent if there are all these instances of prior art?
Why are you laughing at this? The proposed definition of science is actually quite accurate. Science is a continuing investigation.
Are you implying that you know that evolution is correct, and that therefore we no longer need to investigate other hypothesis?
This reminds me of an episode of "Friends" where Phoebe tells Ross:
"Not so long ago, the brightest minds thought that the world was flat, but we now know that it's round. Are you so arrogant as to suggest that you are so much smarter than they are, that what you believe today can't be disproven in the future?"
I'm probably way off on the quote, but that was the gist of it. I don't see anything wrong with defining science in this way. If you have a problem with it because it allows evolution to be questioned, then you are the one who is being dogmatic and arrogant.
And, yes, I'm secure enough in my intelligence to use a "Friends" quote to defend my definition of science.
I can see it now... "No, No, No, the pocket protector ALWAYS goes on the left side!"