Author: Uri Blass
Date: 04:06:56 09/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 06, 2000 at 06:48:17, Ed Schröder wrote: >On September 06, 2000 at 06:08:10, Uri Blass wrote: > >>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. > >Rebel+me = elo+200. > >Ed I am sure that you can help Rebel but is the 200 elo based on test games? 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.