Author: Otello Gnaramori
Date: 11:44:43 08/01/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 01, 2002 at 14:02:22, Chris Carson wrote: >On August 01, 2002 at 12:57:06, Otello Gnaramori wrote: > >>On August 01, 2002 at 11:58:46, Chris Carson wrote: >> >>>On August 01, 2002 at 11:47:35, GuyHaworth wrote: >>> >>>>Did Hiarcs do enough to earn a GM norm, had it been carbon rather than silicon? >>>> >>>>Does FIDE acknowledge such achievements, or not? >>>> >>>>How can Hiarcs (or any engine) accumulate norms over time ... by proving that it >>>>is the same program that accumulated the previous norms ... given that ... >>>> >>>>Hardware/software combinations have a habit of evolving and might ... to quote a >>>>phrase ... go down as well as up. >>>> >>>>g >>> >>>GM norms are only for humans. FIDE will not allow any computer to play in FIDE >>>sanctioned events. Tiger, Junior, Fritz, Hiarcs, Rebel and the King all have >>>very good (2600 and 2700, norm strength) results. >>> >>>SW Versions and HW are important. The SSDF list is a very good reference and >>>Tony's page provides Human vs Computer results as well. >> >> >>Dear Chris, >>I'm back in the forum after a long absence. >>I was wondering if in this long discussed debate are we just comparing apples to >>oranges ( as many people think) or are we hitting against the human proudness >>that doesn't admit to be beaten by a piece of "hot silicon" running at tot Ghz. >> >>My Best, >>Otello > >Apples to apples. Chess is Chess. Human performance vs machines or other >people is measurable. > >Human proudness can account for some of the resistance to factual data >(irrational beliefs). However, there is another dynamic at work. Some people >rely on "research" funding and money is a strong motivator. Money can be a >motivator to overstate chess program skill (let the buyer beware) and can also >be a motivator to understate chess program skill (it is harder to get "research" >funding for your pet project if computer chess skill is above a certain level). >Another motivator I have seen in this debate is that of loyalty to friends. >Program/HW/ASIC X is the best ever and nothing will ever be better because my >friend created it, thus all other chess programs/HW must be shown to be sub-par. > >One last motivator is that some people just like to argue. They have a need for >human conversation/contact and are willing to argue (troll) to get it. > >Chris Thanks for your answer. As usual I find myself to be in agreement with you almost 100%. I've said "almost" otherwise other people can suspect that we are the same person... :) w.b.r. Otello
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.