Author: blass uri
Date: 10:50:13 01/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 15, 2000 at 11:09:45, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 15, 2000 at 02:37:44, James Robertson wrote: > >>On January 15, 2000 at 00:45:04, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>I'll bite on that discussion. Exactly _how_ did you learn to do this so >>>quickly? Looking at the programs of others? Asking questions that several >>>of us answer as quickly as possible? >> >>Of course. I owe so much to all you guys. And I doubt Hsu developed DB in >>complete seclusion. >> >>> >>>Now how much is known about the _real_ design work of DB? How many know >>>anything about "belle" which is where the chess processor design really >>>started? Etc. >>> >>>There is much less known about DB's hardware, because hardly anyone is >>>interested... >>> >> >>Ok, here I see you have a point. I have been taking it for granted that DB's >>chips were advanced versions of what already existed, and this may not be true. >>It is possible he did something completely different and original. >> > >that is the _wrong_ question. The right question is "If someone else wanted >to continue the deep blue project _today_ how long would it take them to catch >up to the point where Hsu is? While Hsu is off doing a new machine by himself >without IBM involved? I claim 12 years +or longer+... > >And during that 12 years, Hsu would also have 12 years. He would not be >caught, most likely... > > > >>Still, I will take this back to the original discussion; could DB have been done >>without Hsu? I believe there are many ways to make a supercomputer that plays >>super chess. Hsu invented one way, and others could invent other ways too. >> >> >>>> >>>>And they met with brilliant success. >>>> >>> >>>Didn't Kasparov lose the match? That doesn't spell "S-U-C-C-E-S-S" to >>>me. :) >> >>I was being sarcastic. :) His brilliant plans to change his stye (Game 6: ... >>h6!!! Deep Blue falls for the trap and plays Nxe6) met with stunning results. :\ >> >>James > > >There we agree. poor decision (and no, I don't believe it was an accident, >I believe it was planned.) It was clearly an accident. I remember that Kasparov thought when he was in book and this is a proof that it was an accident. I believe that he did not think about the first mistake Qe7 becuase he knew that he wrote a book when he claimed that Qe7 is the best move and did not like to admit that he is not sure about it. Uri
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.