Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 19:23:05 10/04/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 04, 2000 at 18:07:52, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >Hello, Hello Frank, Without wanting to take side or saying that next has happened, i think the basic issue from human viewpoint is next: if you get a beta version from a program S, it is NOT appreciated to use tests from this program S for a program T you SUDDENLY operate at a world championship. Especially considering you know a line where a program S plays horrible, it is not very fair to use this knowledge against a program S. This i tell without wanting to get involved into any juridical fight or courtcase, which for sure is gonna happen following the seriousness of accusations i saw. A lawyer who is checking out this email should also take into account that i don't claim to be responsible for THIS email if anything is said that can help either side, as i wrote this at 4 AM and i feel real sick now and i can't even remember what i did a minute ago, so the above lines can be nonsense too, not to mention what is written below. Marcus tells in his chessbits that i was mad in the tiger-diep game. Yes i was mad at myself, but nor near as mad as most are when they lose, and people get dead pissed when someone is also rubbing you in what is happening, especially if just another operator who thinks this program is real good where in fact just book is doing well, and the program sucks incredible, and also doesn't even realize it's won after book even though it's at my screen. Some people just don't know how to play tournaments. All crafty operators so far even sucked more as i did for example. Probably crafty operators are usually just too nice guys. Academic too smart to be able to operate a computer. You need a chessplayer who's mean, who wants to win anyhow, who doesn't want to forfeit any game, and who sure knows that it must think the whole game (so not turn of pondering) and who sure realize that there is something major wrong if you're out of book in Najdorf after 10 moves. Now that really says something about how bad they do, how bad i am as an operator, i say a lot usually, that pisses dudes off, but i also comment on the bad performance of my own program a lot. usually starting at first move out of book. others say a lot, which usually isn't a big deal, i say a lot too, i get always punished for saying things. Usually i prefer playing against an operator who can play a bit of chess, because you at least can analyze during the boring hours that the game plays. Playing the programmer is even better, except when the names of the programmer is Ed or starts with Chris. Note that Ed is a real nice guy but he's saying less as my cat does about computerchess. If he says something about Rebels implementation then it's complete bullshit. he said at wmcc for example that rebel prunes in a smart way, it can prune at any ply, and it doesn't use a search as replacement. Well that kind of programs has at most 1500 Ed! As with induction you miss things if you allow to prune in the root, because you said that it can prune in the root too, and i asked in dutch and i'm native dutch, so are you. No language misunderstanding there. But still it's cool to see Ed at tournaments even if he says shit. He's a nice guy. He's a programmer. There is still this statement: "silent people win gold". Still Ed can talk wonderful in english about the wheather at those tournaments and you can shake his hands. But if you play against an operator who can't play chess, then basically you have nothing useful to say except ask what the score of his program is despite that you can read that better as he can, Making a joke now and then, one must be very careful if you're playing opponents who have put a hell of an effort in their program. Beating yourself at your breast with other man's effort, even if you don't realize that, then people get mad. Stefan even got rubbed in that he was playing a prepared version of Tiger and he got rubbed in that he was playing a line that was prepared against him using his beta version which was given in big trusts. But personally if i would have lost that game with Shredder, then Marcus would not be alive now. >I have no understanding that people which make a very good work for all computer >chess persons got an attack from a commercial firm. > >The question for me is know ... Can I write in my News Ticker or fora about >commercial products ? I asked for messages for the permission but if firms have >an interest to make negativ publicity I have no interest to added information >about this firms on my webpage. > >I think this is very clear know ! > >It is good to read the statement from Marcus but know I think it is better to >write other information per eMail ! > >I like the program Shredder and the fantastic work from Stefan Meyer Kahlen and >I like the work from Marcus. I think the other persons have the same opinion. I >mean I made also in the last years mistake and wrote not the best messages in my >News Ticker but it is clear that we all are not perfect. > >Frank
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.