Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:13:50 05/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 10, 2000 at 02:34:18, blass uri wrote: >On May 10, 2000 at 02:18:51, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On May 09, 2000 at 20:11:26, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On May 09, 2000 at 08:55:46, Hans Gerber wrote: >>> >>>>On May 08, 2000 at 23:32:40, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>No... because the solution doesn't exist, which means that the logs are just >>>>>pieces of paper that won't prove cheating, nor will they disprove cheating. >>>>>As such, their importance is really only in giving us some insight into what >>>>>DB could do, things that many didn't know (depth, etc). >>>>> >>>>>As far as Hsu, you are on the wrong person. Hsu didn't have _any_ control >>>>>at the match. He designed and assembled the hardware. He (and others) wrote >>>>>the software. But legal and marketing folks took control because they realized >>>>>how valuable the P/R was going to be, particularly if DB won, but even if it >>>>>lost. >>>>> >>>> >>>>Must I repeat that for me Hsu is responsible because he "made" the hard- and >>>>software, with others of course? My point was that a scientist had had the >>>>obligation to reflect the mentioned problems and to find solutions. If you are >>>>convinced that logfiles had no meaning for the question of cheating, then I said >>>>that Hsu should have found a form of protocol that could give us the possibility >>>>to examin that. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>But if the computer is non-deterministic in its behavior, _how_ will you ever >>>>>prove whether it played some particular move or not? And if you can't, you just >>>>>lost any chance of using the logs (which Kasparov wanted) to prove that it >>>>>either did, or did not, cheat. >>>> >>>>I disagree. Non-deterministic doesn't mean that the development couldn't be >>>>analysed and controlled that led to a certain move. If the machine played a >>>>different move also the files should look different. >>>> >>>> >>>>>You should look at a tournament played last year. In a well-known scandal, >>>>>someone used a computer program to whack GM players like flies. He was a >>>>>2300 player himself I believe. He had a TPR over 2600. So yes, humans will >>>>>cheat, given the chance. >>>>> >>>>>As far as "on its own" how would you confirm that? How to be sure that there >>>>>is no 'access'? IE no rf link, no magnetic link, no laser link, no sonic link, >>>>>no optical link, etc... >>>> >>>>As I said elsewhere comparately weak players would try to cheat but not the best >>>>players. I don't want to discuss thechnical difficulties without being an >>>>expert. My point was that in principle such a control should be possible. >>> >>> >>>My point is that preventing 'crime' is _impossible_. Otherwise, after a couple >>>of thousand years, banks would no longer be robbed. Web sites wouldn't be >>>broken into. Computers wouldn't be vandalized. >>> >>>There are some things you can _not_ prevent. >> >>Totally agreed. Some practical examples to make it more clear: >> >>#1. Going with the mouse over a certain part of the screen could tell >>the program to force the search to play the best move sofar. >> >>#2. Going with the mouse over a certain part of the screen could tell >>the program to change certain parameters. >> >>#3. .......... the list is endless ......... > >The example of going with the mouse can be prevented by choosing honest >operators. > >Uri I will take your "honest operator" and offer him $100,000 dollars to do what I ask. Or I will offer him $1,000,000. IBM had deep pockets. Are you sure you can find an operator that will be honest enough? And remember, _I_ have some say-so, because the operator has to be able to handle the possible problems that can come up... such as entering the wrong move, or backing up a couple of moves if the operator makes a technical error. There would be more than enough doubt in any operator, just because of the potential for being bought and paid for...
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.