Author: Ralph E. Carter
Date: 07:51:07 12/24/98
Go up one level in this thread
On December 24, 1998 at 10:29:38, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On December 24, 1998 at 07:01:15, Ralph E. Carter wrote: > >>On December 24, 1998 at 01:15:13, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On December 23, 1998 at 18:07:40, Ralph E. Carter wrote: >>> >>>>On December 23, 1998 at 10:17:10, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 23, 1998 at 01:31:12, Ralph E. Carter wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On December 22, 1998 at 23:02:59, Steve Lopez wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On December 22, 1998 at 20:09:45, Richard Heldmann wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Which PC program recommends ...h5? Please post the answer. I'd like to see >>>>>>>>someone disprove Kasparov. That should be simple enough, agreed? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>OK, Richard, glad to oblige. Junior5 (running as an analysis engine in >>>>>>>ChessBase7 with 8 MB hash tables) finds 11...h5 as its preferred move in 7:50 on >>>>>>>my Pentium II. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The silence has been broken by the sound of Garry chomping crow (especially >>>>>>>since he has stated a preference for Junior5, so I'm sure he can check it for >>>>>>>himself). >>>>>> >>>>>>I am happy to hear about this! >>>>>>I am sure you are pleased too. >>>>>> >>>>>>But the other side in this argument does not eat crow. >>>>>>There will not be an end, or an admission. >>>>>>They will find more positions to question. >>>>>> >>>>>>It is MOST ironic, and especially satisfying to ME, that JUNIOR is on THIS side >>>>>>of the argument!!! >>>>> >>>>>It might be embarassing (in a way) to Junior's programmer however, since he is >>>>>a Kasparov "supporter". However, as you can see, Kasparov's credibility has to >>>>>be near zero with most everyone now... every time he makes a claim, or a >>>>>blanket statement (no program can find this move...) he ends up looking like an >>>>>idiot yet again... >>>> >>>>((That's what I meant by MOST ironic! My posts are often ridiculous, but Junior >>>>5 speaks with an authority that is unlikely to be challenged in this case!)) >>> >>> >>>You obviously don't know Kasparov very well... :) >>> >> >>(((You disappoint me Dr. Hyatt. When I said "there will not be an admission", >>and "THEY will find other moves to question", I had someone ELSE in mind. >> >>Once upon a time, there was a long, long thread in CCC. It was presumably a >>search for truth, since it was conducted by two famous programmers in a public >>forum. The following was posted, I paraphrase: >> >>"Under a multithreading operating system, with more than one process competing >>for I/O, often the sequence of events suggested by the ordering of the output is >>misleading. In this case, it cannot be used to conclude that one process ended >>before another." >> >>I was hoping to hear the conclusion of this thread, it had been so long. The >>reply was: >> >>"Yes, you are right. My argument was based on a false assumption. Thank you." >> >>No? There was no reply? >>Maybe the thread was NOT a search for truth. My naivete humiliates me again.))) >> >>>facts mean little when he is talking about deep blue, it seems... > > >sorry... I was focusing on the comments made directly by Kasparov, which is >where the remarks/comments originated. We finally got to the bottom of the >misunderstanding on the axb5 move... had nothing to do with multi-processing >or anything else. The output was perfectly normal. A "word" in the output >was changed by someone in the discussion "recovering vs reconstructing" and that >led down a path that was not important at all. Once that was caught and we >explained what the "recover" meant, all mystery disappeared and the "conspiracy" >went away on that move... it was perfectly obvious that DB did everything that >the output said, and the output was quite clear in what was going on and why. > >This latest comment happened *way* after the match (as in a week or two ago) >which is why I didn't consider any "others" in the conspiracy theory. :) Thank you for clearing this up. I like it when issues are resolved.
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.