Author: Albert Silver
Date: 11:00:48 01/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 15, 2000 at 13:50:13, blass uri wrote:
>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 think Kasparov is an accomplished actor. For 5 straight games he played the
most bizarre opening moves without a clue as to what DB might answer with; yet
in the last he finally chooses a normal opening, an opening he can confidently
predict the direction it will take and suddenly he has ghosts from a book he
wrote 15 years before? I have trouble believing that. Just as he know the best
lines in every line, you can be certain he knows what is wrong with every other
one. This is the man who has studied the evolution of opening theory from last
century until today. I think no one is more qualified to dump a game in the
opening than he is. Years of making faces has certainly served him well.
Albert Silver
>
>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.