Author: Frank Phillips
Date: 10:24:05 08/17/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 17, 2004 at 13:03:45, Matthew Hull wrote: >On August 17, 2004 at 12:15:49, Frank Phillips wrote: > >>On August 17, 2004 at 07:51:41, Terry Giles wrote: >> >>> >>>On TV tonight (Tuesday 17th @ 09:00pm and also 11:50pm) in the UK on digital >>>'free to view' BBC FOUR a showing of "Game Over" - Kasparov and the machine. A >>>documentary film of Kasparov's match with IBM's Deep Blue. >>> >>>Terry >>Quote taken from ChessBase >>"VJ: I don't think it really matters what I believe but there's a huge body of >>opinion in chess that Deep Blue made two moves that could not have been made by >>a computer. These moves are the fulcrum of the film – when they happen you watch >>Kasparov collapse, you watch a man fall apart because either the fix is in or >>the machine is capable of things he isn't prepared for. I think there's ample >>ambiguity to think that the fix was in. Definitely IBM played hardball. They >>mastered the psychological warfare that's part of championship chess and they >>deployed all the resources of a giant corporation to break Kasparov. I'm not >>sure he'll ever be the same again. He was like a finely tuned clock that got >>stamped on. Ultimately, whether they cheated or not, the breaking of Kasparov >>was an act of enormous cultural vandalism." > > >That's a load of crap. We should all say to Mr. K, "welcome to our world". >There is no need to invent a conspiracy as the reason for the crushing of his >oversized ego. > > > > >>[end of quote] >> >>I was looking forward to this....... >> >>Huge body of opinion. I will be intrigued to find out what that means. Hopefully the quote is taken out of context, but seems to show a definite bias. To be silly, clearly any computer that selected randomly from the set of legal moves could play the moves being referred to – whichever they are. It is not hard to suggest that an search+evaluation might also. In any case, I thought the log were and perhaps are still available for analysis. To start from the premise that no computer could play these moves, and move to, they were played therefore not by a computer is rather tautological - unless supported by some evidence to demonstrate that indeed no computer _could_ play such moves. We will see. “....I think there's ample ambiguity to think that the fix was in...” Have to wait to find out what this means. On the face of it, reeks of guilty until proven innocent. “....Ultimately, whether they cheated or not, the breaking of Kasparov was an act of enormous cultural vandalism......." LOL. IIRC he got paid about $1M. Hopefully the film will investigate why he played so badly and acted like a spoilt child, although the latter less surprising than the former, I guess.
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.