Author: Albert Silver
Date: 12:39:13 01/30/06
Go up one level in this thread
>>>>>Article 12.2
>>>>>
>>>>> A. "During play the players are forbidden to make use of any notes, sources
>>>>>of information, advice, or analyse on another chessboard."
>>> I hear many people claim that human vs computer chess is over. The computers
>>>have demonstrated their superiority. I think it's time to change the rules to a
>>>more level playing field.
>>
>>I don't think you need to make changes in the rules. There are rules to cover
>>the diverse situations. You said there are special rules for handicapped people,
>>and make no issue about it, but special rules for computers are a problem. I
>>fail to see why.
>>
>>Remove the opening book? Remove the endgame tablebases? I really fail to see how
>>that is going to make it a 'level playing field'. All you will be doing is
>>devising ways to weaken the program, so that humans can beat them.
>>
>>Eventually, even that won't help, and then what will you do to 'level the
>>playing field'? Less RAM? No CPUs over 1 GHz allowed? You either accept that a
>>program is exactly that: a program. And cannot be compared to a human, or you
>>start treating it as a human, and demand all kinds of silly things of it. For
>>example, it is forbidden to take notes during the play. Programs do exactly that
>>with their hashtables. They write down the moves and evaluations and consult
>>them. This is forbidden! Etc. You get the picture.
>>
>> Albert
>>
>>>
>>>Regards
>>>Tony
>
>
>Thank you Albert,
>
> This quote "You either accept that a program is exactly that: a program. And
>cannot be compared to a human,..." tells the whole tale. Now we can look at the
>subject of this thread with a different perspective! We cannot compare humans
>with computers. Any attempt is by it's nature contrived and favors one side or
>the other. This was my initial point. I of course am a computer chess fan or I
>wouldn't visit this site daily, But I get tired of seeing posts like this.
>Regards
>Tony
I thought it was clear that Rolf was joking, and was a variation on Pichard's
post on Anand's special right to a match for the world title.
Anyhow, I don't view anything as especially favoring humans, unless it is by
doing what you proposed (perhaps jokingly): to find artificial means to weaken
the program's chess playing performance.
One can perfectly well compare humans with computer programs in chess in the
simplest form: chess playing performance. If you want to debate how they go
about reaching their chosen moves, then it is pointless, but if you want to know
who wins more games in the long run, then games and matches between the two are
the only way to know. CEGT, SSDF, and others, only really show how well one
program does against other programs.
Albert
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.