Author: stuart taylor
Date: 20:18:02 01/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 11, 2000 at 22:57:58, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 11, 2000 at 21:46:38, Roger wrote: > >>Excerpt from the interview: >> >>"For instance, if you were to remove the database, you can >>have a computer ten times faster than it is today. Ten >>times faster than Deep Blue, easily. If it couldn't >>consult its opening book, my result would improve >>immediately. I think most of the top twenty, thirty >>players could beat Beep Blue if it wasn't allowed to >>consult an opening database. Or, even the opening >>database is restricted to a certain size. What happens >>is, their opening database is almost 400-500 MBs of >>information. It has access to all the games that are >>played but we have to remember all that. Or, if I am >>allowed to have a computer with me, okay, I can't check >>my thoughts but I can see what was played at any given >>time. My result would then go up." >> >>I think he's wrong about having a computer ten time faster than Deep Blue >>without the opening database. >> >>Still, what to make of the comment that the top twenty or thirty players could >>beat Deep Blue if deprived of its open database? >> >>Roger > > >I would agree. Anand is a good guy, but he doesn't know diddley about >computers. Opening book does _not_ slow the program down. I have no idea >where he got that. Probably based on the idea that if a human used a book, >he would do a lot of page flipping and stuff.. He didn't mean that! He meaned IF it didn't have access to its database then-even if it be ten times as fast etc. Still---------etc. That's what it looks like he meaned to say. S.Taylor
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.