Author: Otello Gnaramori
Date: 02:20:11 04/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 20, 2002 at 20:51:49, Terry McCracken wrote: >On April 20, 2002 at 19:05:11, Otello Gnaramori wrote: > >>On April 20, 2002 at 17:50:36, Terry McCracken wrote: >> >>>Of course you and I are far more advanced then anything we have yet created. >>>Also it is demeaning to be lowered by machines through other people's eyes. >> >>Have you never thought that chess doesn't require a very high level of human >>intelligence ? > >Yes and for humans it requires intelligence, period. That is >a mistake to think otherwise. Known this for years and years and years. >For machines, it's different and we are different than machines, IE Computers. >Does a Mathamatician need intelligence? Of course! Does the computer? No! We >give it other ways and means to solve. We _invent_ the process for them! The difference between the mathematician and the machine is that the latter is based on a reproductive approach, while the real mathematician is not limited to solve differential equations, but can also give creative contribution to the mathematics discipline with e.g. new complex theorems. Chess is a kind of restricted mathematics context, the rules are well defined and the machine has "just" to solve a well defined equation with the help of its relentless speed and memory, in this field the machine can excel over the human and the simulation is near to perfect nowadays thus giving the false illusion of an intelligence behind it. >> >You got to know simple rules and have very good visual memory to excel... ok the >>training is important but you haven't got to be an universal genius. >>Think about it ... > >I have and know you don't need a 180 IQ but it does help, like memory practise >etc. > Memory is the key factor IMHO. w.b.r. Otello
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.