Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 17:22:07 08/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 22, 2002 at 02:26:40, chris larson wrote: >When I want the advice of a moron Scott, I will look you up. My question (if you >can read) was about the difference between "Deep Blue" and "Deeper Blue" and why >people are referring only to "Deep Blue", not about your very modest opinion of >whether or not they will come back into active referring For the record, IBM only refered to the thing as "deep blue". The "team" used the terminology DB1 and DB2 as I have been using to be consistent with them. I think it can be quite misleading, but this was a problem discussed with the USCF many times during the days of "blitz" and "cray blitz". How would you like to be a human, playing a machine that last year searched 1K nodes per second and earned an official rating of 2250+, only this year it is going 20x faster but still has that same rating. You _know_ it is stronger but your rating is going to take a beating because now the machine is under-rated. That has always been a problem. And it will continue to be one in the future since a program can run on many different types of machines and produce many different types of results depending on which it uses... Another reason humans don't like computers in events. The ratings of computers is _very_ inaccurate.
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.