Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 14:28:29 02/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 07, 2000 at 16:25:34, Alvaro Polo wrote: >This board IS about computer chess, of course. In fact, it is the best place >about computer chess that I know, including the "Intelligent Chess Forum". It is >true that there are quarrels, big egos and everything else that you mention, but >this goes with the territory. and maybe people like chris have problems with terretory and big-ego's. maybe he likes to fight and therefore attacks the other egos, or he dislikes to fight. maybe he likes to share ideas about chess. and cstal is IMO his entry-card to come in and say: this is my thing, try it out and say what you believe about it. and than let's discuss. about the whole topic. and maybe the others , especially those beeing very on top, do not want to talk. because they don't want to tell secrets. i remember that in rgcc there was for a long time discussion and nice talks about computerchess by ed schroeder, chris whittington, bob hyatt, bruce moreland, peter gillgasch, tom kerrigan etc. this was - as we all know, destroyed one day ... but --- it was possible. i think chris contributed to this. vincent did too. others enjoyed too. this was great. but it's over. now we have a new forum, but the whole day the people fight about silly things instead IMO. > If the "big guns" make impossible to talk about >computer chess here, it means that it is not possible to talk about computer >chess anywhere, because those "big guns" are the people that know the most about >the matter. IMO the big guns give the direction. they make the IN things, and the OUT things. and if somebody is against their ideas, they shoot and - the way is free again to talk about IN things. therefore they have to ban the OUT guys, because they have different ideas about how anything is and this somehow destroys their authority. like in school. the teacher has an opinion. and anybody who has diametral opinion interrupts his teaching, from the teacher's point of view. so the teacher tries to show all the others that HE is right. and the others applause when the IDIOT who is against the teacher is killed. because the teacher has more power. very rarely the "idiot" is capable to stand this outsider position without beeing shot. Society is about brainwash. the succesful give the tone, they give the directions and brainwash the others. they are the leaders. the society i would like to see is different. in the society i would like to live, it would not forbidden to be against the leaders, against the IN guys. but that is very difficult to generate and to fullfill. > It is much more interesting to read messages by Hyatt, Moreland, >Whittington (when he wants to talk about computer chess), Ban and such people >than to read what Sean Evans or Rolf Tueschen have to say. :-)) right. but it seems impossible to generate a forum where people, no matter if IN or OUT the artificial-society are allowed to express themselves. e.g.: chris has different ideas about HOW TO DO computerchess. his program and himself are excentric. but - IMO it does not look as if he is an idiot and his ideas are shit because i see that his program is not that weak at all. but what he says is often against the common sense, or against the way the others do it, or want it to do. so what to do with such a heretic ?? Where to burn him ? Who wants to kill him ? I know how difficult it is to be "other opinion" than the mainstream. i would not have worked with chris for such a long, without liking the idea that it can be done different. and the whole time people looked on the result and said: oh - what you are doing or trying to do is shit. it will not work. people have stopped to follow these ideas at universitys long time ago. or they told me these nice statements: the guy you work with is a very bad person. he is a criminal. he has done this and that, you should not work with him. this took years. i have made different experience with chris. he had different ideas. he worked long time realizing them. and he succeeded IMO to show: it can work. and i have never seen him behave criminal. or like an asshole. i saw that he is a father of a big family. and "the boss" of a little company. he has dreams. he has weaknesses. but we all have. but what i see is, how societies brainwash their members, and how they stamp the members to follow the mainstream. to be slim not to be a problem for the leaders. when somebody of the enemies makes a joke, anybody of the followers waits if the boss laughs, and when he laughs, than the leader-pack laughs too. >Bits and "beans" are also computer chess. bits and beans is still the mainstream. although i think that this method is dead, the only thing is, it has not registered it. like the dinosaurs, they saw the asteroid at sky, but they did not understood that this is their end. but when bits and beans does not allow the others, who do not want to follow and to jump on that train, to exist without isolating the minorities, than bits and beans is a dictatorship. i remember how the people talked about Thomas Nitsche (Mephisto III programmer) at the championship 1986 in cologne ! as if he is a crazy fool. an idiot. somebody who will never understand "how to do it" , "how to make money" and "how to do it right". when he walked into the hall, to hold his lecture about his ideas in mephisto III-chess-program, people arround me (at those time these guys arround me were shallow kind of "friends", i later saw that these guys are the plague, because the always talk about somebody when he is away, and when he is near they behave friendly towards him - like best friends) whispered: his ideas will never work. but later, when the whole icca and also these "friends" sat next to thomas and richard (lang) + ossi weiner (at those times nitsche was OUT and Richard Lang was IN. Richard was succesful , so whatever he did was ok and right. what nitsche has done was OUT) they were very polite to him, the same guys who called him an idiot when he was far away. the same repeated itself 1993 in munich, when thomas visited the party for a while. and so any group behaves towards outsiders. no matter if these outsiders are too good for the group, or really dump idiots. the group cruxifys the outsiders. what they say is OUT and heretic. and each group needs these outsiders. because all the weaker guys, who feel pressure, can give the pressure and hatred away, can canalize their anger on these pressure-black-wholes, on these outsiders. what melts the group, is the hate against the outsiders. this is the reason very often humans behave like animals, like wild animals, and kill or behave in a very drastically way towards outsiders. if the leaders allow the group to kill the outsiders, and nobody else has the courage to defend them or to stand up and say: no, than the group will follow the leader and kill the outsiders. this repeats over and over again in history and society, in big groups and in smaller ones. what said the children in littleton WHY they killed the others ? because the others discriminated them. because THEY were the outsiders. and they were tortured by the group, and one day they took revenge and took guns and killed the group. this was the problem with sean and tueschen too. and with hitler. and the germans. when the leaders allow the group to kill the outsiders, those who are against the mainstream, than you have fascism. no matter where. and WHO do this. no matter if americans in usa, and the outsiders are indians and negro, or in israel, and the outsiders are the palastiniens. or in northern-ireland, and the outsiders are irish people. systems who are fascistic allow to kill the outsiders. and therefore you should not be surprised that scientology (read ron hubbards: dianetik) allows the group to call the one against the system for free, so that anybody is allowed to attack them. in the moment such an ideology grows, fascism grows. please : don't mix it up. i do not say this happens here. i just want to show how the development goes. chris believes he is the outsider, and i can find content-reasons in how he thinks and how his program is different to believe this. a society attacking the minority will develop into this direction. and now the question is: how does this society en miniature here will develop? Are we here to say: ok - this is thomas nitsche, anybody is allowed to call him an idiot ? or do we say: ok - this is thomas nitsche, he is allowed to stay as long as he swears to believe in brute-force categories, and gives up his heretic ideas about selective-search ideas and chess programs doing a 3 NPS search-tree. > There are another approaches, of >course, and I don't think that anybody is censoring these. the society has clever methods to do so. e.g. you watch television. but the television companies do not publish ANY news. they filter the news. depending who has bought the television-channel only certain NEWS is allowed to be published. in the war of the united states (as the group-leader of the NATO) against the jugoslavs it was easy to watch how the mechanism of manipulating /brainwash works. all the channels showed how right it is to attack these citizens. and when there was an outsider saying: oh no , i don't think it is a good idea to throw bombs on children, mothers and civil-citizens who have done nothing wrong than beeing another nationality... these guys were a) not published b) the leaders allowed all others to attack them and to "kill" them in words c) all the doubts the leaders had, or the group had, was canalized in hating those having a different idea about the bombing of civil-inhabitants. and the tv-channels reported propaganda-news instead of real-objective news. because any society works like this. there are the leaders and they dictate how the rest of the group is allowed to breathe in and out. and there is freedom only in the range the leaders allow it to be. freedom yes, but only as long as you don't strike against mc_donalds. freedom yes, but only as long as you don't say something against how we do it. you can be as free as you want, but in the moment you are against us, we kill you. >If Chris, or anybody >else, don't want to talk about computer chess here they shouldn't talk here, >because this is a CC board, not an AOL chat. right. but i don't think this here is all about computerchess. it is about humans. and how groups behave. there are mechanism stronger than us. we know them. but because we all want to be loved by the group, by the leaders, by our fathers and parents, we forget them each day. otherwise we would see that we are not free, but slaves. and that the democracy we live in is in fact the dictatorship of the leaders. of the mainstream. and the ones having the power are not the ones who know the most, but the ones who have lied the best, and who were as mean enough to be that corrupt, noone of us could stand to be. just my ideas about the mess. :-))
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.