Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Kastner vs Millennium: is it possible to get max 3 sentence résumé?!

Author: Marcus Kaestner

Date: 01:58:45 12/07/00

Go up one level in this thread


wise words, thorsten. there is nothing to add

marcus


On December 07, 2000 at 04:10:17, Thorsten Czub wrote:

>On December 07, 2000 at 02:19:34, Jouni Uski wrote:
>
>>What's all about and who is winning...
>>
>>Jouni
>
>is it important who is winning or who is right ?
>obviously the "problem" damages all 3 involved groups.
>
>Ossi gets damaged because he again is again suing people like hell,
>stefan gets damaged because he has a good program but gets pulled in a
>muddy sea,
>rebel-team gets damaged because they get parts on the mud on their heads too,
>marcus gets damages because suddenly lawyers discuss what he has written in
>his chessbits edition.
>
>the thing is about trusting people.
>IMO you cannot "solve" it in an open public forum without hitting each
>other. language is only a shadow of reality. in the moment you concentrate
>on using language instead of beeing real, you will lose.
>
>language forces you to think into dualistic categories, when their are no
>such categories in real life.
>language produces contradictions and paradoxon when in reality there is none.
>
>language is imperfect to "solve" reality. you can only try to decribe it,
>to come near by trying to be accurate (bob would say: language is like
>computerchess, be accurate and you will come close !).
>
>but : as we all know: any poem or any song in lyrics comes nearer to reality
>(and much more direct) than cerebral language does.
>because if you THINK you normally move within the limits of plein aristotelic
>logic. the guy is good or he is bad, or i can't say what he is.
>
>thats all.
>
>but in reality you have more stages than those 3.
>
>so why trying to be accurate, when you produce contradictions and paradoxon ?
>better NOT try to be accurate and speak in images and metaphorical and in poems
>(new paradigm :-))) to directly hit the nail and cover reality.
>
>any speech that goes into peoples mind, for long time, was made by emotions.
>images. dreams. so the opposite of rational-logical language.
>
>the ideal that you could talk in logical, rational way, and SOLVE anything by
>talking cerebral is utopia !
>
>all you do is produce contraditions. no wonder that in a few sentences people
>call each other liars.
>if they would all sit arround a table, they would drink a beer together and
>forget the shit.
>
>but no - we are intellectuals. we have a brain, and we believe in rationality.
>and we are capable to program chess sources. line by line. command by command.
>therefore we are capable to sit arround a table and to make anything clear ?!
>to say what is the truth and to be honest and open and human like ? all in on
>gesture ?!
>
>its not possible.
>
>logic is only the beginning. it can never be the end. and it cannot solve
>such a conflict.
>because this conflict is not about logic. or rational things.
>it is about irrational things.
>
>therefore judges cannot "solve" it.
>
>all these things are modern kind of duells.
>
>in old days people took a gun or a sword, and when ossi has a problem
>with marcus, they both made a little duell, and in the end the "case"
>is over :-)
>
>today we are more civilized. we hit each other at court.
>ossi is very famous for fighting senseless law-suits.
>there are others in germany too. i don't name them here, not to
>get a yellow card, :-))) but i could name them and the court case
>easily. why germany ?
>because here we have (or better HAD) many big companies sharing the
>computerchess market. german-language-room is a very big computer-chess market.
>
>who controls germany/austria/netherlands/suisse...
>will survive.
>
>therefore they fight with really mean tricks.
>
>programmers have to sell their products to those business-man.
>and thats the moment programmers get pulled into the mud.
>
>on the other hand sometimes those business-man help programmers
>(if they like each other and profit from each other)
>and this makes it all difficult.
>
>who is right and who is wrong ?
>
>who will win is another question.
>
>the winner is not always right.
>
>all difficult.
>but i don't think language will solve this.
>only humans can solve something. if they forget to think in
>logical and rational and cerebral categories. cause life is IMO
>more than +/-/= .
>
>IMO one should respect each other as human beeings the way
>to put this in consideration.
>words are just words. humans are more important than words.



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.