Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 07:01:58 10/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 18, 2000 at 08:29:18, Mogens Larsen wrote: >No, you added Gandalf to your special new-paradigm club. right. and i have my reasons to do so. > Knowledge based >programs are hardly a novelty, so the term "new-paradigm" is a little silly. in your opinion. not in mine. Knowledge based chess programs are old, yes. but the new-paradigm i am talking about means more than knowledged-based. So please : be more precise. it can only be silly in yur opinion since do did not created the term you criticize. you can of course critisize anything you want, but when you don`t know what a word or phrase means, how do you want to call this "little silly". you can call it "little silly" that YOU order it into a wrong context (knowledge base). thank you. >There's a lot knowledge based programs available. right. you seem to be very experienced. >But you're right about one thing, Gandalf isn't a bean counter AFAIK, even >though that definition is slightly blurry to say the least. bravo. >Btw, chess programs don't make plans. indeed ! this is new to me indeed. i thought so :-)) aha. good that you tell me mogens. i will write it down that i don`t forget it, and will try to keep it memorized until tomorrow. > You interpret their moves as a plan, but >it isn't. I DO INTERPRET ? mogens: do you have a brain ? i guess so. now : do you see the world outside ? i guess so. can it be that you INTERPRET the world outside with your brain ? could be , or ? now: ANYTHING is interpretation. there is nothing OBJECTIVE that cannot be seen without subjective interpretation of human brains. show me a thing that is NOT interpreted by human brains. if you find something let me know. than i would call this a new information. >>May it be that your reading capacities are somehow limited ? >>From time to time, when they come out with a new product, >>i do try to buy the programs. It is not my job to inform you about >>a product that comes from your mother country, isn't it ?! >>maybe you oversaw my posts about gandalf. > >I must have missed your posts. what a pity. >When you compared Gambit Tiger to CS Tal why not >mention Gandalf as well if you've always been a Gandalf fan? i did mention it... see post a few messages above. Forgotten now ?! >It seems obvious >given the knowledge you possess about the program. obvious. >>I don't see what you mean ? Context ? I attacked Gandalf ? >>Is it possible for you to speak in a sensible way, with sentences >>i can , with my limited capacities in opposite to your infinite, follow ? >No, I was thinking about your attack on the "bean counters". A more constructive >approach might be preferable if you really want to achieve something resembling >a change of mindset. :-))) paradigms get changed themselves. the old dinosaurs die out, and new paradigm come automatically. you cannot stop this. >>Of course i know Gandalf for a long time. And i was always a Gandalf fan. >>Was this a mistake ?! May i have to give back my disks, cd's and handbooks?? >No, I don't think so. Why would you want to? this was ironical mogens. >>Sorry when i stepped on some of your intimite "rights" concerning Gandalf. >>I will in future not again step into denish terretory, as i have seen >>it is a difficult terrain for foreigners... they still have some of those >>vikings. >I don't have any rights in that regard. I'm just puzzled about your ability to >reason from absolutely nothing. Yes - this is really true. how do you know that i reason from "nothing" :-)) sorry - "absolutely nothing" i see you are capable of these scientific-terms... > One might say that your relationship with >objectivity, knowledge and facts is very speculative indeed. I am sure YOUR "relationship" with "objectivity, knowledge and facts" is that of a real scientist and realist - of course - realist. at least you knowledge about interpretation of things shows me that you are really deep into that topic. I think it fits pretty well for me to like knowledge-based and intelligent-chess programs, because i don`t like bean-counter programs that play silly. my whole life i tried to push the intelligent programs, and tried to show and work out the knowledge within. My idea was to help their programmers to make the programs even more knowledged or to test the implementation of knowledge in chess-programs, beginning with Superconstellation, Mephisto III, Saitek-Leonardo Maestro and Julio Kaplans programs (especially the knowledge about pawn-structures :-))) i am sure dirk frickenschmidt will laugh now loudly) and and and. Of course Gandalf was always one of my favourite programs, because Steen made sure Gandalf uses static knowledge to direct the search. this way gandalf is creating speculative king-attacks. >Mogens. THORsten
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.