Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:32:22 01/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 28, 2000 at 11:25:41, Amir Ban wrote:
>On January 28, 2000 at 08:11:13, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On January 28, 2000 at 06:09:13, Chris Carson wrote:
>>
>>>On January 28, 2000 at 03:22:28, Ed Schröder wrote:
>>>
>>>>On January 27, 2000 at 22:17:53, Albert Silver wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On January 27, 2000 at 21:32:07, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On January 27, 2000 at 21:18:05, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>>>[snip]
>>>>>>{regarding DB support}:
>>>>>>>This is an unforgivable sin here or anywhere else. I think it quite funny
>>>>>>>that (a) folks wonder why Hsu doesn't post here; and then (b) attack anything
>>>>>>>they do as inferior.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I have said this before... They are far better than anybody (other than maybe
>>>>>>>myself and a couple of others) give them credit for. Just continue to watch
>>>>>>>the analysis of the DB logs. We suddenly discover that (a) they are searching
>>>>>>>a lot deeper than some kept thinking; (b) their branching factor is actually
>>>>>>>not much worse than the rest of us; (c) etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Best to wait and watch. Lots more will come out over time... But the
>>>>>>>naysayers will _never_ be silenced...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I find it very puzzling the huge amount of absolute hostility towards Deep Blue
>>>>>>[and HERE of all places]!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The last match was 1997. That's about 3 years ago, and we still talk about it
>>>>>>almost daily. Nothing comes even remotely close to being as interesting as the
>>>>>>Deep Blue match. Nothing has ever generated the publicity for computer chess
>>>>>>like the Deep Blue match.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And yet people are clearly *angry* at the Deep Blue team. Is there some sort of
>>>>>>history that would explain it? I keep feeling that I have walked late into a
>>>>>>movie and everyone is panning the hero, who seems like such a nice guy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Most amazing of all are the sort of persons who are irate. Almost always
>>>>>>incredibly intelligent computer science types.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>*boggle*
>>>>>
>>>>>It's human nature. Remember that the last DB news wasn't three years ago but 3
>>>>>weeks ago. Until this news, there had been at least two hopes, however remote:
>>>>>
>>>>>- DB would somehow and somewhen be taken off the shelf and play another titanic
>>>>>match against Kasparov (or anyone)
>>>>>
>>>>>- DB would be made available to all as a PC card.
>>>>>
>>>>>DB was by far the strongest chess playing machine ever built. Nothing came
>>>>>remotely close (except for its own predecessors). And now we are told clearly
>>>>>that neither will ever happen and Hsu has gone off to greener pastures. Nothing
>>>>>wrong with this, EXCEPT that Hyatt has made it clear that it is his belief that
>>>>>NO ONE will reach that level for another decade because all of its secrets are
>>>>>locked away. Everyone, including the programmers, feels deeply cheated. NO DB
>>>>>and much worse: no way to build on DB so to get there you have to start from
>>>>>scratch. This is simply terrible. It wasn't destroyed, the designers didn't die,
>>>>>and the blueprints still exist; they are just locked away, and since Hsu has the
>>>>>key, he is the butt of the anger. So the reaction is understandable: rather than
>>>>>accept this, many would prefer to tear it down so the pain is lessened. If you
>>>>>can believe it will only take 5 years to get there, it seems less tragic. That's
>>>>>what I believe this is all about.
>>>>
>>>>Maybe the fact that they don't play is part of the game?
>>>>
>>>>Ed
>>>>
>>>
>>>Ed, that is my frustration, although I understand why
>>>they limited play before the match, I am confused about not using
>>>DBjr after the match with the SSDF or Computer tournament. There
>>>is a financial conponent, as well as a reputation component. :)
>>>
>>>Best Regards,
>>>Chris Carson
>>
>>
>>There is also this pretty important person with the title "Vice president of
>>marketing." _HE_ makes all the decisions about P/R activities.
>
>It does indeed seems true that the way the Deep Blue project carried on was a
>result of narrow commercial reasons.
>
>This may be an explanation, but not a vindication. A pioneering project that was
>supposed to done in the name of science, and in a sense our entire 40-year old
>field of computer chess, was made hostage to the short-lived, almost trivial,
>interests of IBM Corporation. If we believe this to be true, then we should be
>VERY angry.
>
>Amir
I personally sensed a feeling of frustration in the DB guys when I talked with
them. Particularly in the last match, the _real_ DB team was pretty well put
in the background. The lawyers/marketing folks called the shots, made the
decisions, told Hsu/etc what to do, when to jump, how high to jump, etc.
Because it was a _BIG_ marketing deal to the folks at the top, and they wanted
to extract every bit they could from it.
I can only imagine how frustrating that must have been. Since Hsu no longer
works at IBM, I can guess...
This page took 0.01 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.