Author: blass uri
Date: 04:02:17 05/08/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 08, 2000 at 06:12:24, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On May 08, 2000 at 04:42:23, blass uri wrote: > >>I think it is better to give humans excess to endgame tablebases instead of not >>giving the computer excess to endgame tablebases. >> >>I do not like doing things that reduce the level of the computers. >> >>If humans think that computers are too strong it is better to help the humans >>and not to reduce the level of the computers. >> >>I do not think that programs are too strong and I think that there is no >>justification to give humans equal conditions about tablebases. >> >>Other possible idea for the future when programs become stronger are: >> >>1)Letting humans to use chess books(computer programs are also allowed to do >>it). >> >>2)Letting humans to move pieces in another board and to write notes to help them >>to play better. >> >>3)Letting both sides to take back moves in the game when for every take back you >>have less 5 minutes on the clock so you cannot take back moves forever or in >>time trouble. > >Why is all your suggestions aimed at satisfying the needs of computers? You >would rather destroy chess as we know it, instead of forcing computer programs >to abide by the present rules. _No_ auxiliary databases of any kind to support >any player during the game, whether the player is silicon or carbon based. If you can remember the database in your mind you can use it. The question is what is included in the "mind" of the computer. You can look at the tablebases as part of the computer's mind. Uri
This page took 0 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.