Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 19:33:02 07/25/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 25, 2000 at 20:30:19, Bruce Moreland wrote: [snip] >I am not interested in speculating about the tiny bit of evidence that exists, >so as far as I'm concerned the thing doesn't exist and isn't worth talking >about, certainly as long as they snub our field while taking its honors. The >project is not science Because the chip is patented, you can find out exactly what it does any time you like if you have a master's degree in EE. You have to explain what is going on when you file for the patent. >and it's not competition, It isn't any more. It was at one time. It did not exactly hide in the closet during its heyday. >it was just a well-financed PR >gimmick, Agreed. >and that's shit I think it's the best thing that ever happened to computer chess. Here it is, 3 years after the last time anyone saw heads or tails of the darn thing and we're still yammering on about it. Look at how many people are interested in computer chess now. I suspect that it would only be fringe interest without Deep Blue, but we can't wind back the clock to find out. So our opinions differ. I think IBM had the right to pull a stunt and make a ton of money, and then hide in the corner, since they could only lose if they play again. If the experiment was important enough scientifically, someone would back Hsu and we would see exactly what it can do. Therefore, it must not be all that important. >and I'm not going to let it mess up my life. Agreed. >People who wait 20 years for Bobby Fischer to come back are pitiful. I'm sure >not going to do that here. Wise position. Imagine ending up like Kenneth over on rec.games.chess.misc
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.