Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:06:48 10/22/97
Go up one level in this thread
On October 22, 1997 at 05:13:13, Thorsten Czub wrote: >>Just so you quantify who "some people" are. > >Quantify ? I thought qualify ?? Whatever... > > >>In this regard, list me as >>a "follower" not as a leader. > > >Where is the difference between leaders and followers ? >The one cannot live without the others, and both do not STOP anything ! > > >>My original application asked for a >>K6/233 >>machine. After seeing alphas and PII/300's popping up everywhere, I >>decided >>that to have a fair chance, Crafty needed faster hardware. > >But this is the point ! Our whole discussion was about FAIRNESS ! >If ANYbody wants to be fair in a very egocentric way, ANYBODY will bring >HIS fair super-dupa-high-speed Pentiumxyz 4xx Mhz Machine or more ! >Fair means : not to be fair against yourself ! Fair means always: >To be fair towards the group ! >Fairness is not a term of reflexive action. It means an act into a >social group! > then talk to the *commercial* guys. *they* have led the charge to use faster hardware every year. *every* year. Don't talk to me about "fairness" because I am trying to keep up. Talk to them about trying to keep ahead. *every* year. >> I'll happily >>play >>on "equal" hardware. > >Brilliant. > > >>I won't happily play using "inferior" hardware. > >Right ! > > >>Why >>don't you guys get together in Paris and stop this? > >How ? >Revolution ? >Kidnapping ? > > >> IE make it uniform >>platform. I'm not sure what platform, but either make it *one* specific >>machine, or else drop the subject and let the event run as it has since >>the >>first WMCCC event, where anything goes so long as it is a commercially >>available microprocessor. >> >>Either change it, or put up with it. But all the complaining is doing >>nothing but creating hard feelings and lots of posts here, while the >>original problem still remains... > >1. this is a club for discussions ! >Where should we post LOTS OF POST if not here ?? > >2. this is not complaining. This is a discussion. Without TALKING about >something in a pluralistic/democratic forum, nobody would know anything. >Talking is the first thing. You correlate/exchange your opinion with >others. >Then you can act ! If you are allowed to act. > talking here does nothing. talking at Paris can accomplish a lot if the majority want uniform platform. But I'll bet the decision will be to allow anything. It always has, at least.. > >>>Kind of silly that again this tournament is first a search for the best >>>hardware and then to the best software. >> >>the "again this tournament ..." is important. specifically *again*. It >>has >>gone on forever. If enough want it stopped, make it uniform-platform >>and >>be done with it. I'll play either way. As is or uniform. > >You cannot relate the OLD champioships with the championships today. >In the old times, BIG COMPANIES leaded the championships. They had >SPECIAL hardware and they were unable to change the hardware. >Today we have PC's ! >Many programs run on a pc. So it should be senseful to give the >PC-programs an equal hardware platform. partially true. But the programs were *still* run on hardware that was not for sale, at clock speeds that were unavailable. IE the Mephisto machines are one example. > >In the old times this was much more difficult with some programs using >the 6502 in assembler, others the 68000 and other companies the 1806 and >z80A. Naive. What about the current group of .asm programmers? Same exact problem as before. .asm to get a speed advantage, then should we select a non-x86 platform, we get whining about "oh no, I'm in assembly and I can't port." Who's fault is that I wonder??
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.