Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 11:06:59 12/22/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 22, 2001 at 04:10:49, Tony Werten wrote: >On December 21, 2001 at 17:02:52, Tom Kerrigan wrote: > >>On December 21, 2001 at 12:14:47, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On December 21, 2001 at 00:43:18, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >>> >>>>On December 20, 2001 at 21:19:44, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 20, 2001 at 20:12:06, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On December 20, 2001 at 18:30:51, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On December 20, 2001 at 17:56:17, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I can't think of a reason why commercial programmers would have an edge over >>>>>>>>amateurs when coming up with good ideas/techniques. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>When an amateur programmer comes up with lots of good ideas/techniques, then >>>>>>>he'll have success and go commercial eventually. I think that's how Shredder and >>>>>>>Junior proceeded. >>>>>> >>>>>>Right, but Shredder and Junior's authors had their good ideas when they were >>>>>>amateurs and implemented them in their amateur programs, which confirms my point >>>>>>that amateur programmers can have/implement good ideas just as well as the >>>>>>commercial programmers. >>>>>> >>>>>>-Tom >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Of course. The difference is the amount of time/energy one is ready to spend. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Christophe >>>> >>>>Well, based on your last two reples to my posts, you agree with me completely. >>>>So why all the noise to Scott about how commercial programs use vastly >>>>different/superior techniques than amateur programs? >>>> >>>>-Tom >>> >>> >>> >>>Because they do, and it is the result of the amount of time and energy spent on >>>it. >>> >>>I would not even say that the techniques are vastly superior, but there are a >>>number of differences that end up in a significant strength difference. >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >>Then we're disagreeing again. I still believe that whatever techniques you're >>using can also be found in amateur programs. > >Could be. But it's very possible that in these programs, these techniques don't >really shine because of the existance of bugs, and the lack of finetuning. Both >can be solved with a lot of time. > >Tony Oh, absolutely. I'm not trying to claim that amateur programs are just as good as commercial ones--that's stupid. But it seems like there's a relatively small number of good ideas in chess programming, so I'd be surprised if Cristophe or any of the other commercial programmers have come up with anything that hasn't been implemented before in amateur programs. Sort of like microprocessor design. Hardly anybody is doing anything new. Quality lies in the implementation. -Tom
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.