Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:18:24 01/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 06, 2000 at 07:32:03, Graham Laight wrote: >On January 06, 2000 at 05:30:55, Graham Laight wrote: > >>* In the case of Crafty, maybe it really isn't at GM level - or maybe Bob is >>demoralised by the number of times it's been beaten on the ICC, forgetting that >>that the ICC conditions, while useful for research, are not truly representative >>of tournament chess conditions > >Probably even more important in Bob's case is that he has always wanted to >strongly promote the idea that multi-processor computers are massively stronger >than (single processor) PCs. It would be a blow to his esteem if it was proven >beyond all possible doubt that PCs had attained a GM level of play! pure nonsense... I believe multiprocessor systems are _better_. And that is provable by simple measurements. But it says nothing about how strong the things are on one cpu.. only that they are better on 2. > >>* In the case of Ed Schroeder, I think he suffers from low self esteem. He seems >>to have developed a fear of competition. Also, maybe the long years of > >Actually, I'm not really sure whether Ed has low self esteem, but in the past he >has certainly avoided competitions. If he'd gone to the '97 WMCCC in Paris, I >would have been able to meet him in person, as I did many other programmers, + >legends like David Levy. > >-g > >>proclaiming great results, only to be knocked back down by a humiliating defeat >>at the hands of a GM have created within him an automatic reaction of excessive >>modesty when asked about his programs relative to strong human players > >>* In general, every programmer who has spoken to "positional" IMs and above will >>have heard expressions like, "What a terrible move that was positionally". >>Certainly many GMs said that many times about DB during its successful match >>with GK in '97. But DB still "brought home the bacon". >> >>* Chess programmers are often timid people, who prefer to have other people heap >>credit on them, rather than shouting out their achievements for themselves >> >>* For so long, computers have been worse than GMs, and GMs emphasise the >>computers' weaknesses so strongly, that it is easy to see how, in the absence of >>truly compelling, utterly indisputable evidence, most people could easily miss >>the moment when the computers really do reach the GM level. Think about this: it >>is conspicuously clear that the vast majority of Wall St traders miss the >>moments when the market's primary trend turns up or down sharply - it's almost a >>truism by definition! >> >>But if Bob Hyatt wants to laugh, I say "go ahead" - laughter is known to be good >>for your health! >> >>-g
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.