Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 06:04:00 06/17/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 16, 1998 at 23:56:28, Don Dailey wrote: >>>You are always implying that you have some special insights and >>>that others are in some kind of conservative rut. But all your >>>ideas have been on an extremely high level of abstraction. Saying >>>"use more knowledge" or "make your program search fewer nodes" >>>is not a very coherent plan, and reveals no insight whatsover. >>> >>>You often use the time honored technique of being critical and >>>pointing to the problems and saying it loud enough that no one >>>notices you are not presenting any solutions. >> >>Not having solutions doesn't mean one has to be acritical. I don't know how to >>make a violin, but I am entitled to say that a given violin sounds horribly, >>even if I can't offer better solutions than telling the maker to improve the >>instrument. Same with chess programs. Not being able to program and therefore to >>present solutions doesn't mean Thorsten must shut up about programs that play >>chess. > >He has no obligation to shut up, I'm just hoping he will. Not in general >but about Fritz and all the dig's about the materialists. It would be a dream... :) > I would like >to hear him be positive about the approach he prefers without having >to be negative about the "materialists." > > >> >>> This makes it >>>appear that you are privy to a better way when in fact you are >>>not. >>> >>>But you have said nothing we do not already know. Every >>>programmer on this group knows what the most serious problems >>>of computer chess are. >> >>Don, the vast majority of us are not programmers. Maybe we find interesting some >>issues that don't interest you, and viceversa. CCC stands for chess computer >>club, not for chess programmers club. > >I am used to working with people who are not programmers but big >contributers. I think of Thorsten as one of these. Larry Kaufman >is not a programmer but everyone knows he was a big contributor >to our chess programs and he knew as much about the program as I >did. Thorsten may not write a single line of code but that does >not mean he cannot have good ideas. If you think I am one >of these guy's who say, "you cannot program therefore your opinion >is not valid" then you are mistaken. Then it was a discrepancy between what you meant and how I read it. No problem. Enrique >>> And each one of us is keenly interested >>>in solving them. Stop attacking us as "materialists" which is >>>a gross overstatement of what we actually do. We are simply >>>engineers and will always be writing the strongest programs >>>because we will always use the techniques that work best. >>> >>>The truth of the matter is that if you want to have a TOP program >>>RIGHT NOW, you MUST have a very fast program with significant >>>knowledge engineering. If you want to innovate, experiment and >>>be able to claim special insights that other do not have, then >>>you must be content with a program that SUCKS. If this changes >>>then the engineers will be right on top of this change and will >>>conform, because they will always write the best and strongest >>>programs. >>> >>>In my opinion you have no special insights whatsoever on what >>>to do about the problems of computer chess. But if you want >>>to prove me wrong, then I am willing to listen to any concrete >>>solutions you can present to us. > >>And here you are using the time honored technique of shutting up someone's mouth >>for not being a professional in the field. It is as if I would tell you that you >>can't analyze Thorsten's words because you are not a linguist. It wouldn't make >>much sense either. > >You are completely wrong about the way you understood this. My strong >wording was designed (perhaps poorly) to extract some ideas from >him. Thorsten DOES present himself as something of an expert so I >believe he can take the heat. I do believe that he has no real >solutions but as I said I am willing to listen to anything he can >present and I mean just that. > > >>Thorsten knows about games played by programs as much as the best of us. We may >>like or dislike his style, agree or disagree with his points, even get mad as I >>do at his occasional aggressivity, but disqualifying what he has to say for not >>offering solutions is in my opinion irrational. >> >>Enrique >> >>>- Don > >So I'm not angry at Thorsten and neither do I believe us programmers >belong to an elite club where no one else dare disagree. > >Maybe my post was too strong, but I stand behind what I said. >Thorsten presents himself as an expert and so I will deal with >him as an expert. And if anyone else has any ideas they want >to share I will listen, whether they program or not. By the >way, programming is the easy part, it's the ideas we need to see. > > >- Don
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.