Author: Jonathan Lee
Date: 11:10:09 05/17/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 16, 2000 at 23:42:04, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On May 16, 2000 at 21:03:53, Jonathan Lee wrote: > >>Yes, I agree with the money or profit motive. Most GMs are slowly losing money >>in human/human tournaments. (The adult attendence is decreasing except for kids >>in scholastics, but kids get trophies.) A stereotypical GM is from Eastern >>Europe; they went to western free world. Even in the west, most of them are >>still making just enough money to make ends meet. >> >>The problem with machines is that the hardware is almost always faster in the >>future not slower. This leapfrog or subset effect won't go away. >> >>If the current trend in Moore's law continues without impediments in computer >>hardware science, by the year 2015 computers will be as fast as Deeper Blue. >>IBM's software "Shallow Blue", slower version, is not next to Fritz 6, Junior 6, >>or RebelTiger 12. >> >>Grandmasters' time is numbered. >> >>Jonathan (40th version) > > >Note that computers do not win cash prizes. In USCF events this is specifically >forbidden. In most other events the computer operator agrees to such a >stipulation before they are allowed to enter. > >In a round-robin, this works fine. Everyone has to play the computer. In a >swiss, this can cause a few problems since everyone doesn't play the computer >and that can skew the final standings, so that even if the computer doesn't win >a prize, it exerts an influence on who does win it. Programs could possibly be played anywhere in the world, and in addition sharewares give easier access. It is up to the best one thousand players in the world alive (maybe much less), for each one to decide on how to deal with this issue. There are too many variables to look at if and when top players are toppled. Jonathan (41st message)
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.