Author: walter irvin
Date: 13:00:50 07/26/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 26, 1999 at 15:56:21, KarinsDad wrote: >On July 26, 1999 at 15:16:36, walter irvin wrote: > >>On July 26, 1999 at 14:42:56, KarinsDad wrote: >> >>>On July 26, 1999 at 13:49:31, Mark Schreiber wrote: >>> >>>>I have a question that I have not seen in the opinion poll. Now that the Fide >>>>world champion Karpov has drawn 1 game with Shredder at slow time controls, >>>>should computers be allowed to play in the qualifying matches for the world >>>>championship? Even if a computer did not become world champion, It would be >>>>interesting to see how far a computer would go. >>> >>>My short answer is no. >>> >>>The World Chess Championship has been a human achievement for the last hundred >>>years. It should stay that way. To have a silicon monster as the reigning World >>>Championship will cause more of a split than the FIDE/PGA one did. >>> >>>I also do not want the Fritz team or the Junior team (or whomever) to have >>>control over the World Chess Championship for 2 years or whatever. It's bad >>>enough that FIDE tries to control it. The politics involved with a silicon based >>>champion could extend into things such as multiple computer manufacturers >>>getting in the picture, etc. >>> >>>And finally, unlike human players who may get better, or may get worse over >>>time, the programs will only get better (on average). Hence, once a program wins >>>the championship, it would probably only give it up to another program. That >>>would effectively end the World Chess Championship as we know it (i.e. we would >>>have to construct a separate championship for humans only anyway at that point >>>in time). >>> >>>KarinsDad :) >> >>i dont know maybe you underestimate humans ,humans can be the most diabolical of >>chess players,i dont think anymore that computers are destoned to be all >>powerfull , really believe that deep blue would not have beat kasparov in a >>longer match. human learning is far better than computer learning , plus there >>is this diabolical factor of the human mind. i think people will always find >>away to win . > >It is not that I underestimate humans, I just do not underestimate human >programmers. > >I compare this to checkers. Can Chinook be beat anymore by any human? > >I compare this to othello. Can any human beat Logestillo? > >Granted, we are not yet at the level where a chess program on current technology >can probably be World Champion (DB is no longer in the picture), but it is only >a matter of time. And my main view is that if the program were to win and hang >onto the title, people would just want a championship with just humans in it >anyway (i.e. we would just want to go back to NOT having them in, so why have >them included in the first place, just to see WHEN they will succeed in taking >the championship away?). > >KarinsDad :) > >PS. Look at Chinook and Logestillo. People will NOT always find a way to win. maybe your right end the end , but for now and maybe the next ten years it would be exciting to see.
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.