Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 17:25:47 01/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 11, 2001 at 17:15:12, Dann Corbit wrote:
>On January 11, 2001 at 17:01:45, Ulrich Tuerke wrote:
>
>>On January 11, 2001 at 16:50:36, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>
>>>On January 11, 2001 at 16:42:21, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>[snip]
>>>>I suggest null move and futility pruning because they are easy to implement and
>>>>well documented, and will definitely make the program much stronger at a low
>>>>cost.
>>>>
>>>>I do not suggest that by using these two techniques you will create a top
>>>>program.
>>>>
>>>>I guess that you already know that the most successful techniques are not
>>>>publicly documented. That's the fun of chess programming: do it yourself.
>>>
>>>No, that's the tragedy of chess programs. Because money can be made,
>>>information is hidden instead of shared.
>>
>>I don't think that it's a tragedy. If all these tricks were published, we would
>>probably not have this variety of chess programs; instead of "individuals" we
>>would probably have a group of rather similar programs. Couldn't this be a bet
>>boaring, Dann (even if each of these would play a bit stronger than today's
>>toppers thanks to wisdom sharing) ?
>
>Bad science. We benefit because we hide what we learn? I don't believe one
>sub-atomic particle of that.
>
>Whoever says this is shouting a big lie. If we should shout it loud enough and
>long enough people will believe it. But that won't make it true.
>
>Mankind benefits from the sharing of truth.
Really?
The main engine of mandkind progress is competition. It is not cooperation.
This is how it works. The ideal of "sharing the truth" is a generous idea, but
this is not how it works in the real world.
The only animal that behaves according to your idea is the ant. And maybe the
bee (I'm not a specialist).
But competition is written in our genes. We love to hate each other and to fight
each other. We love to create groups and to belong to groups, then to fight the
groups in which we do not belong. Fighting is the activity we love to spend our
energy in.
That's ugly, but that's the way we are.
Computer chess would be nowhere by now if there was no competition in the field.
Christophe
> Whether this truth is mathematical
>or philosophical or metaphysical or whatever. Hiding the truth is *ALWAYS* so
>that we can benefit _ourselves_ rather than others. Isn't this completely
>obvious? We can justify it any way that we like.
>
>Now, I also understand economic reality. If you share what you know in computer
>chess, other people will try it. If you have a competitive edge and you
>describe how you got that edge, you just lost your edge. That is too bad, and
>that is what drives the secrecy. The sort of ideal world I envision is entirely
>impractical, and I am aware of that. It does not stop me from lamenting,
>however.
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.