Author: Uri Blass
Date: 03:08:10 09/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 06, 2000 at 05:42:53, Peter McKenzie wrote: >On September 06, 2000 at 04:12:01, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On September 06, 2000 at 02:20:28, Peter McKenzie wrote: >> >>>On September 06, 2000 at 01:52:00, Ed Schröder wrote: >>> >>>>On September 05, 2000 at 18:22:25, Jason Williamson wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 05, 2000 at 18:17:26, Ed Schröder wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On September 05, 2000 at 17:51:28, Peter McKenzie wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>How about it Ed & Christophe? >>>>>> >>>>>>Hi Peter, >>>>>> >>>>>>I haven't changed my mind. There is still no control. Until then... >>>>>> >>>>>>Ed >>>>> >>>>>What do you mean no control? >>>> >>>>That nobody knows the games are 100% real. To gain creditability these >>>>games should be played in public (on the chess club or so) so everybody >>>>can see what you are doing. >>>> >>>>I understand it's an obstacle but it is my reason not to participate in >>>>this tournament. The operator can do what he want as there is no control. >>>>He can override moves, change the time control, force a move he likes and >>>>and and. >>>> >>>>Another way (although it solves not eveything) is that somebody else (the >>>>TD) is send the program before the games and carefully checks the moves. >>>> >>>>I think playing serious tournaments on Internet has a great future. More >>>>it has the power to become a serious counterpart for the yearly world >>>>championship computer chess if these kind of things are arranged well. >>>> >>>>Ed >>> >>>With Internet events, a certain amount of trust is required. I just don't see >>>any way of getting around that in the near future. >>> >>>But consider this: does it really matter if someone tries to cheat?? >>> >>>Can an operator really improve a program's performance? Don't forget that the >>>time control is quite fast (30 10, or 45 10). I think that the programs are so >>>strong now that even if someone cheated by manually choosing different moves, it >>>would be very tough to do any better than letting the computer play by itself. >>> >>>For every move a human can improve on, there are probably 2 other moves where >>>they just stuff up. It might be easy to poke holes in computer play AFTER the >>>game (hindsight is a wonderful thing), but not nearly so easy to do this >>>confidently DURING the game. >>> >>>I guess someone could use another program to cheat with, but really lets not get >>>too paranoid here. Most of the participants are quite well known in these >>>circles, and seem to be pretty trustworthy. >> >>There are many aspects, I will limit myself to one. >> >>Speaking only for myself: I don't want to become into the temptation to >>cheat. >> >>[Q] Do I trust myself? >>[A] Yes. >> >>[Q] Do I COMPLETELY trust myself? >>[A] No. >> >>Here is a story from a long time ago, actually it was my first tournament >>the WCCC 1986 in Cologne. Playing in the last round Rebel had a winning >>position and if Rebel would win that game then Rebel was the new world >>champion all classes. >> >>On a given moment it was considering 2 moves, the good move and a losing >>move. When I saw Rebel was changing its mind to the bad move somebody told >>me I should press the "force move" button so the good move would have been >>played. I wasn't willing. Then the person in question moved his hand to the >>"force move" button and "in a second" I had to decide what to do. I did the >>right thing and pushed his hand away. Rebel played the bad move and Rebel >>lost the game. After the game I was called stupid throwing away the title. >> >>In that remarkable "second" the option "why not" certainly crossed my mind >>and I think that nobody is excluded from such temptations when so much is >>at stake. >> >>[Q] What will I do next time? >>[A] Probably the same >> >>So I end as I started: I don't want to become into the temptation to >>cheat, not anymore. > >Do you honestly believe that you cheating would make Rebel any stronger? > >I'd say that if most program authors (myself included) started overriding their >program's choice of moves then their program would just play WEAKER! > >It might be an interesting experiment though... It may be an interesting experiment to play a match between a program and itself when in one side of the game the programmer has the right to fix the moves. If programmers are intelligent enough their program will not be weaker by fixing the moves because they will fix the move only when they are sure that their program do not understand the position. I think that it is a good idea to do the tournament as tournament of teams(program+operator) so the only way to cheat is by using another program. Uri
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.