Author: Jay Urbanski
Date: 16:00:25 10/19/04
Go up one level in this thread
On October 19, 2004 at 02:56:31, Tony Nichols wrote: > blah, blah blah... > As far as the future goes...Chess is not a purely mathematical game so humans >will always have chances against computers. I think as hardware technology >progresses we will see changes to match rules. For example; limited opening >book, limited endgame tablebases, maybe even longer time controls. All these >things favor the human player. In fact just taking away the opening book would >eliminate interest in these matches very quickly! Computers do not know how to >unbalance the position very well. They tend to play very passive openings or >just complete garbage. When a GM plays against a computer in the opening he's >actually playing against other GMs. You could a chess program think for a month >and it's never going to play the first ten moves of the Najdorf! Well this is what everyone theorizes, but I've done a few small experiments on ICC and this hasn't happened (that GM kills computer). I think I will organize a match to test this theory. I will try and get a top GM to play at least 20+ games against a top machine (I have a quad Opteron). Any votes for a meaningful time control? I don't think we'll get anyone to commit to anything longer than 15 minutes or so. > > So my opinion is very much in favor of human players. I think they are still >far stronger than computers and will be for some time. > > Tony
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.