Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 12:08:04 05/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 18, 2000 at 15:03:14, Mike S. wrote: >On May 18, 2000 at 14:27:05, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>(...) >>Personally, I think that failing to rise to the challenge of playing computers >>shows that man's time for dominance in the game has passed. Humans may >actually *be* better right now. But already, the spirit has been broken. >Hence, humans have already lost. > >I don't think so. This fight has just begun. > >In a wider public, some might think that the 2nd match Kasparov-Deep Blue has >drawn the final curtain over human superiority in chess. But (as it has surely >been said often already) if you look at this match in detail, it shows Kasparov >as the better player: He won the first game, resigned the 2nd in a drawn >position, drew game 3-5 and threw away the last one in the opening, which >doesn't matter much. The only "real" victory was by Kasparov. The problem, as I see it, is that the *GM's* believe that computers are better. Or at least, they are afraid to play them. And I think Kasparov is probably the better player even than Deep Blue, but he himself is definitely afraid to play against computers, even the micros [only my impression, I could be wrong]. If the fight has just begun, why are the GM's running in the opposite direction?
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.