Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 16:57:39 06/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 13, 2000 at 19:18:45, Dann Corbit wrote: > And even the opening database data (while - admittedly - more important than >endgame tablebase data) is not the achilles' heel. If you want to strike at the >heart of a chess program, simply remove the data from the eval function. Now >we'll see who plays crappy chess. Essentially, what you will have is my >retarded move generator chess program. The GM's won't have much problem with >that, but neither will anyone else for that matter. You still don't get it. It's not a question of crippling a chess program, not as far as I'm concerned, and it involves other considerations than the simple ones you present. Of course a human brain is responsible for the code involved in a chess program and the same thing applies for opening books and endgames tables, so it has no bearing on the discussion at hand whatsoever. Opening books and endgame tables are simply not a product of the programmer and rarely something produced by the program itself. A chess program should play chess on its own terms, not through more or less random exterior additions and attachments. You might say it's a question of existentialism. What constitutes a genuine computer chess program? Best wishes... Mogens
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.