Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:39:58 02/20/98
Go up one level in this thread
On February 20, 1998 at 23:26:51, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >On February 19, 1998 at 20:25:06, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On February 19, 1998 at 15:02:07, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >> >>> >>>I am curious as to who went to the Tasc company with the >>>smartboard technology originally? >>> >>>Is there someone who holds a patent on this technology? >>> >>>I thought Ken Thompson and/or David Callenhdar invented >>>this technology years and years ago? >>> >>>On another note, does anyone have one of these Smartboards >>>and want to sell it to me? >>> >>>--Stuart >> >>To the best of my knowledge, Ken did it first. Using (first) reed >>switches and magnets, then, later, coils in the bottom of the pieces >>so that he could tell which piece was on a square. >> >>Dave Cahlander later made one for chess 4.6... >> >>I followed suit with several versions. One using hall effect >>transistors >>to detect magnetic strength, with various sized magnets so I could >>determine >>which piece (specifically) was on a square. Didn't work very well, even >>though I put 4 transistors under each square so the piece didn't have to >>be >>centered. I then used reed switches which worked perfectly. I still >>have >>that board although I haven't tried it in at least 10 years. These all >>date back to the late 1970's era. I first used mine in 1977, so Ken and >>dave were somewhat before that. >> >>Problem was, none of us thought to patent the idea... so it can't be >>patented now by anyone, since "prior work" can be proven... A shame >>we didn't think of it... but it was all for fun with us anyway... > >Better tell ICD! I'm told by their 800 line representatives that >they are prevented from selling SmartBoard because someone in >New Jersey went to TASC with the original idea before SmartBoard >indicating that they could not manufacture it but the presenter >showing the idea wanted to show it. Later, they manufactured it >anyway. The person sued and this stopped its manufacture. > >Imitations like the Novag board do not have the piece-sensing >technology which is apparently what all the hullabullooo is all >about. Those boards require the pieces either be started from >the original opening position or that a new position have each >piece "programmed" as to what it is by entereting in through the >keyboard of the device, considerably lessening its utility for >analysis purposes by players. > >This is almost a direct quote of what I was told at the >ICD number 800-645-4710. > >I am curious who in New Jersey is claiming a patent on this device >and whether TASC knows that there is prior art. > >--Stuart If Ken wanted he could blast the TASC people easily. All that's needed is proof. I personally played a game against belle in 1978 using Ken's RF idea... 8 wires running down the ranks carrying a specific frequency that is varied under computer control, 8 sense lines running down the files. you inject a signal on a specific rank, and read the 8 values from the sense lines. If a piece has the right coil, tuned to that frequency, it couples the transmitter line to the receiver line where it can be sensed. worked well, you could set up a position, scan the board and see what was there. The reed switch boards were a problem in blitz, particularly when pieces get knocked over. But in any case, he had this gadget with him in Washington, DC at the 1978 ACM event. It was about 6" high or so, standard width/length... So I don't see how TASC can patent something that obviously existed *before* there was a TASC at all...
This page took 0.01 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.