Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 15:13:23 05/08/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 08, 2000 at 16:04:28, Hans Gerber wrote: >Perhaps the players have a good argument against playing a computer since it can >not (Robert Hyatt) be guaranteed that no cheating is going on with the machine. > Note that humans can cheat as well. It has already happened in a big way once. With today's technology, there are no guarantees. Even elementary security precautions are expensive (a spectrum analyzer) and easy to defeat (squirting short bursts of data for a few microseconds at a time). >Next aspect. If you consider how badly Kasparov was treated by certain >computerchess people after his match against DEEP BLUE, you might understand >that chessplayers don't want to be just instruments for the glorification of a >machine. > That statement is more of a troll for counter-reply than anything else. Kasparov was _not_ treated badly by computer chess people. He simply did a poor job of planning ahead, thinking about what he would like to see in the event he lost, etc... That wasn't poor treatment by Hsu/et al, it was poor planning by Kasparov/et al... >Another problem. The money. In the case of Kasparov it was argued that he should >have tolerated anything _because_ the prize money was high enough. As if >chessplayers didn't have an almost aristocratic selfunderstanding. Take Fischer >and now Kasparov, if something seemed fishy (to them) they protested no matter >if they might lose a match or were expelled from the event! You didn't quite get the concept right. Kasparov could have written _any_ requirement into the contract he wanted. He held _all_ the cards. IBM wanted to play the best player on the planet. He was that player. They set up a 1.1 million dollar prize fund to lure him to the table. They would have agreed to any term he asked for, to make that match happen. His lack of planning does not constitute poor treatment by the DB team. > >The argumentation by F. Friedel is very superficial that one had to be happy >that the times had changed and no player had to end in an asylum of the poor. > >Chessplayers are like artists. They want to play chess and to create >masterpieces. And they want to have a say in their destiny, not have it dictated by an organization that is more interested in the money than in the players...
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.