Author: John Coffey
Date: 15:41:59 05/02/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 02, 2000 at 17:29:58, Fernando Villegas wrote: >On May 02, 2000 at 17:07:47, Pete R. wrote: > >>On May 02, 2000 at 13:10:18, José Antônio Fabiano Mendes wrote: >> >>>http://www.forbes.com/asap/99/0222/071.htm JAFM >> >>Hmm. Well, despite his claims of not being a sore loser, it still reads that >>way. Unfounded accusations always appear petulant. Secondly his claims about >>chess representing the intelligence or artistic skills of humanity or whatever >>is also a bit of bluster. Fact is, chess is governed by simple, concrete rules, >>and despite its complexity this ultimately aligns it with the strengths of >>calculating machines, not intelligent beings with general-purpose brains. It >>ain't theoretical physics, or anything else that requires imaginative thought. >>The fact that computers can produce similar results via a method requiring zero >>intelligence is proof of that. >> >>He also could have made a deal with Hsu if he were really interested in >>continuing the man-machine experiment. Easily. Instead he took the attitude >>that Hsu should get it all done beforehand, when Kasparov's own agreement would >>bring the sponsor money and make it happen. About as much effort as it would >>take to get off the couch and change the channel, instead of using the remote. >>In other words despite what he appears to claim in this article, his actual >>enthusiasm for another such project is essentially zero. Why? Because he got a >>special delivery from Ass-Handers(tm). ;) > >Hi: >You know? It does not even make sense to lesson what Kasparov say off the board. >The man is running wild. Of course, falling in the silly and childish fallacy to >believe or make believe that HIS area of expertise coincides with the best and >greatest intelectual achievements and endeavours of humanity is nothing but >average kind of arrogance. My God! Just a song by the Beatles is more >interesting and important for humanity than his best games. I suppose in almost >every great player the same megalomania, more open, more hidden, but ever there. >They should read what Alekhine thought about his craft, the sad musings he had >about being expended all his brain power in something that, at the end, "was not >more than a game". Sour, realistic words... >Fernando Gary Kasparov is stating his opinion and nothing more. I am sure that he is an expert on his own opinion. Because of who he is, some of us are interested in what his opinion is. I suspect that he has accomplished more than some of his critics. John Coffey
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.