Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:04:21 11/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 30, 2003 at 16:09:05, Gerd Isenberg wrote: >On November 30, 2003 at 12:59:33, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On November 30, 2003 at 12:11:45, Sandro Necchi wrote: >> >>>Hi, >>> >>>you are not fair as you did not read what has been written about what happened. >>> >>>What happened was allowed by the agreed (by all partecipants) rules. >> >>You are simply wrong. The operator can _not_ choose to play a move he >>wants to play. He _must_ play what the computer says to play. And in this >>case the computer said "I claim a draw" and the operator chose to ignore that >>and force the game to continue. > >The engine versus GUI issue was probably not completely fixed by rules, or at >least interpretable. No, but I have brought this up multiple times. Ditto for the opening books that get shared... The ICGA has just buried their heads in the sand and let the problem escalate. Until this is the result. Is there _any_ valid reason for non-automatic interface tournaments any longer? Yes - a commercial program (or two) doesn't have one. That was the excuse when Ken Thompson and I tried to force this issue 20 years ago using serial ports to interface programs. CCT took the big step to automatic-only. ICGA will continue to "follow" maybe. Rather than being a proactive leader, they will continue to be a reactive follower. And the event will shrink to a single point. > >Is the "computer" the engine and the GUI only a kind of input/output device? >I don't know the exact rules. I don't know whether Jonny used chess knowledge >from the GUI at all, like opening book and/or egdbs. That's the point. It shouldn't be an issue. Because _every_ program should have their own interface, and that interface should have a LAN card on the other end of it, _not_ a human operator. > >IMHO GUIs should only act as input/output devices for none native engines. >"Grafical user interface" per definition, nothing more, nothing less. Only about >entering moves and to display a board and some status informations. >They should not provide any game decisive stuff at all for those engines, >otherwise they should banned. > IMHO they should simply be banned. You roll your own program, you roll your own interface, you roll your own book, etc... But most importantly you roll your own automatic interface to eliminate any humans in the loop _completely_. >Gerd > ><snip>
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.