Event JSON
{
"id": "49fcf5484f69fdb6f04ed52e9efd00db438b011f94a57ad93fa102ab7065ae51",
"pubkey": "5df4b364ef8d29ffb035bd042df6397c75650cc38d627e29a1a24000287ac9e7",
"created_at": 1702020149,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"ed70906254c00a0ef3821462300351b71b3e6ade35539a9b212c61eff29745a3",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub"
],
[
"p",
"0ecb1c9b6fc91390ab51a5a39082f44c4abe0a19ad67c63b709d175ebf23e0f2",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub"
],
[
"e",
"2f5cb8817b4c7eed503da22eba0d861725e71d2ada302bb54869d45240c04009",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub",
"reply"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://mastodon.social/users/tikitu/statuses/111543592496758038",
"activitypub"
]
],
"content": "nostr:npub1a4cfqcj5cq9qauuzz33rqq63kudnu6k7x4fe4xep93s7lu5hgk3szqt2kf how much of an advantage does casual-level strategy-googling give you in modern board games generally? Compared to other sports? (I’m thinking about games like chess and go, where after hundreds of years of analysis there are still multiple sensible options for play even at the most expert levels. If analysis of games with less history tends to converge to “the best strategy” I can imagine why people might want to avoid that.)",
"sig": "47ee72d5b0e3880461a55f18d261da97bc31e357cea24ed268064ede7a63436501769edff841278f46d80b9e5613dec61156399ffb1784bab83b979881a60ce2"
}