Author: Roger
Date: 18:53:24 03/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
I wish I could agree with you Mogens, but I cannot (what did you expect? ;) The fact of the matter is that we DON'T really KNOW the extent to which Xie's Junior can duplicate the moves of Amir's Junior. Could be a lot, could be a little, depending on the relative strength of the machines, and the extent to which Xie can get into an opening in which lots of material can be taken off, simply because it consists mostly of forced moves on each side. Such openings exist, and Xie and her handlers have more than enough knowledge to select one. THAT IS WHY SHE IS THE WOMEN'S WORLD CHAMPION, FOR GOODNESS SAKE!! But my argument doesn't really rest with whether the moves actually CAN BE reproduced with the one gigahertz, Godzilla-squared, Kasparov-on-an-EPROM, Hell-on-Wheels, Silicon Armaggedon, Deep Junior *BEAST* that has so suddenly appeared on the scene in China. Do you think it just appeared in thin air, with no agenda in mind? What are you saying? That there is an entire universe of Deep Junior-like moves that instantiate some Deep Junior style, and that this machine was purchased for the match only with the purpose of learning how to play against the STYLE, rather than against Amir's baby in particular? That logic doesn't hold water, because we have no idea how similar Xie's Junior is to Amir's Junior. BUT I'M SURE XIE DOES!!!!!! And that, Mogen's, is THE POINT. They know and they are not telling. That is why this awful ambiguity exists. Think about this, Mogens. Think about what it means to be a human being. Is means that you never have answers to the really BIG questions of life. For example, is there life after death? Is there a God, or not? People may think they have answers, but to the critical mind, their answers have the status either of faith or dogma, and never the sureness of mathematical proof, for example. Is not the human situation bad enough already? Do we we have to have this awful ambiguity thrust upon us by XIE, so that now our uncertainty bridges not only questions about the meaning of life and the existence of God, what some would consider the core questions of our age, but also extends to chess itself? Think about what life is and what a game is, Mogens. Life is horribly complex, otherwise we would NOT have the existential issues that we do, which we cannot find answers to. A game, however, is comparatively simple. The game may be complex, but it is nowhere near as complex as life, and it allows us to immerse ourselves in a universe in which all the possibilities are potentially knowable, unlike life, where the big existential dilemmas of which will forever remain unknown. That is what it means to play a game, Mogens. That is why you can enjoy a game. Do I need to say it again! But LOOK AT WHAT XIE HAS DONE!!! She has taken an ordinary game, with nice, discrete, concrete 1-0 and 0-1 and = endings, and ADDED TO IT, the additional ambiguity of her one gigahertz, Godzilla-squared, Kasparov-on-an-EPROM, Hell-on-Wheels, Silicon Armaggedon, Deep Junior *BEAST* that has so suddenly appeared on the scene, as I said before. She has taken a tournament and added an ambiguous character to it, so that the fairness of the outcome can never be known. BUT THAT IS EXACTLY HOW LIFE IS, IS IT NOT, MOGENS? Of course it is. I am proud to say that I already have enough complexities in my life. I do not deserve to have Xie adding to them. And you don't either. None of us do. I say it is a shame, and that Xie and her handlers deserve to be publically whipped. You think about that, Mogens. ;) This is my last reply to you. I do not have time for such head-butting. ;) Roger On March 12, 2000 at 21:22:55, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On March 12, 2000 at 20:54:18, Roger wrote: > >>I don't think you get it yet. ;) >> >>If Xie and her handlers had brought an exact duplicate of Amir's machine into >>the tournament, their intention to cheat would have been clear, since they would >>simply choose the right opening to reproduce whole games move for move. > >That would require them to reproduce every possible opening by Deep Junior. Deep >Junior don't choose from all possible openings, but the task would be enormous >nonetheless. > >>Accordingly, for the result to be ambiguous, there must be some subtle >>differences between the machine they actually brought into the tournament and >>Amirs. That gives them exactly the wiggle room they need to perpetuate a facade >>of fairness, what you call "the potential difference between moves." > >What you call wiggle room can be the equivalent of a loosing game due to a bad >choice of move. Amir might even want to test new code in playing conditions. > >>That is why I say Xie should lose this match, because only if she loses will we >>KNOW that the match is real. > >Strengthwise there's nothing that speaks against a potential win for Xie Jun, >nor a defeat. If we knew that DJ was stronger the argument would be valid, but >we don't. > >Best wishes... >Mogens
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.