Author: Hans Gerber
Date: 05:44:51 05/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 10, 2000 at 23:15:56, Robert Hyatt wrote: >First, I was _the_ author, so no, there would be _no_ code I didn't specifically >either write, or validate, myself. Harry and Bert were both long-term friends >that I knew very well... > >There was no outside influence there, most likely. IE it would be possible for >a Cray engineer to do something as we were running on one of their computers at >the corporate computer center. But none of the three of us could do anything >since we were all present... unless we wanted to cheat of course. > >I had a strong suspicion, yes. A suspicion that I had a serious bug in the >parallel search. Never a thought that someone else had exerted outside >influence in any way. > >But the point? If I had been accused of cheating, how would I have _ever_ >disproved the claim? I couldn't reproduce a key move. Of course, my opponent >couldn't have proved that we cheated either... so there you go... back to >square one... > >Programs have bugs... they have non-deterministic behavior... they are operated >by humans that might or might not be dishonest... they can be influenced by >people outside of the operator.. outside of the game room.. outside of the >country even... I don't see how the random variables can be eliminated. > > I have to keep down my strong emotions so that my thought process is not too much disturbed. I think that your report should be analysed deeper. The point is that you as a scientist can handle such a situation of twilight and almost paranoia but let us think of much weaker and less educated individuals. Let me not write down all the consequences. At the same time I'm thinking about, say, Fischer in 1972. The Russians searching for a fly... Is all that possible confusion _not_ sufficient for scientists to make extreme attempts to find solutions of control? If _you_ as a programmer already invest your heart blood into your creation how about the situation of a genius trying to play his best chess? The situation is absolutely paranoid if any idiot could gain control somewhere in the system. Likewise the computers and the environment of a human chessplayer. To know that in principle each act could be counter-acted doesn't mean that we can't do something to protect us. Trust is not enough. At least not when it comes to the world championship ...
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.