All large systems are inherently weak when one individual has an outsized influence on their outcomes. The solution is not to hope Magnus is altruistic, but to not allow Magnus (or any individual) to drive meaningful outcomes directly or through their combined influence/followings.

▲

jacobolus 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Magnus "drives meaningful outcomes" because he's really good at chess and members of the public enjoy watching him play, so various chess-related businesses will pay him money for sponsorship. How do you propose to "not allow him" that influence? Ban all use of people's names in marketing and products?

	▲	SecretDreams 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		My commentary goes above and beyond just Magnus. Re: Magnus. Sponsorships are fine. Him making money is fine. He shouldn't be able to dictate the rules of the game or the platforms by which it is played. IMO. He's not the first person to be "really good at chess". It's a broad statement meant to mean "celebrities have too big of a platform and too much influence over the average joe".

▲

kelipso 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Thank you being a rare sensible voice on this topic. The fanboyism of chess fans is insane these days. I get that the average age of chess fans these days is very low, probably 14 or so, but it’s still pretty annoying.

▲

sigbottle 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Well for the chess world, open source world (BDFL), etc probably okay. For real world governments...