Author: Martin Grabriel
Date: 22:09:27 01/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
why then was Kasparov so uptight about seeing the log? In his mind perhaps he thought the log could prove cheating? I tend to agree with the Proffessor that the log doesn't prove anything..so Kasparov was wrong on at leaset one count -- he believed the log would/could prove cheating. On January 20, 2000 at 22:06:17, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 20, 2000 at 19:08:25, Chris Carson wrote: > >>On January 20, 2000 at 14:27:12, Joshua Lee wrote: >> >>>Do they prove cheating or not? >> >>They do not prove cheeting, however they raise some >>questions. The logs I read from the comercial programs >>leave not doubt about a game, the DB logs do. IMHO. >> > > >How so? Their output provides the same information that most programs >provide... PVs, scores... times... etc... > > > >>The logs should easily prove not-cheating and they do not >>prove that either. I do not believe at this time that >>cheating occured, however, the DB team has not cleared itself >>of a simple to prove issue. IMHO. > > >I think that is _nonsense_. Logs can _not_ prove that they didn't cheat. >Nor can they prove that they did. I'll be more than happy to set up a demo >for you where _I_ make crafty play a move, and the logs will make it apparent >that _it_ chose that move. Would take an hour of programming. > >You can not prove a negative. > > >> >>I do not think it will be resolved. I think IBM got a "free bee", >>packed thier toy and went home. IBM has no incentive to say or do >>anything else and will not. IMHO. :) >> >>Best Regards, >>Chris Carson > > > >What else is there to say?
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.