Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 23:06:46 02/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 26, 2001 at 18:52:30, Wayne Lowrance wrote: >Mogens you come across to me as a student who likes to argue against experience >and knowledge without much of either. That may very well be abslutely true, but I started with "What?!!!" when I read the text and that is good enough for me. The problem is that Christophe is getting away with a line of argumentation that wouldn't be accepted anywhere but here. Not the sligtest mention of possible reasons for possible differences when it comes to preferences about time or hardware. Nothing about knowledge, extensions or the branching factor, which people with knowledge have been kind enough to ask about. These factors make sense and there are others. Instead we're gifted with a statement where the wonders of preprocessing, high selectivity, choice according to style and relative hardware independence are presented as the right way. To me it's obvious without being an expert by any means that all these commandments are debatable and could change the outcome. Off course I would be forced to prove that I'm right, which is ridiculous for obvious reasons. The statement by Christophe was superficial and that, my friends, is a fact you can try to refute. So you and Sune can attach all the labels you want on me for whatever reasons. It doesn't really bother me that much as I'm not forced to drink coffee and make conversation with any of you. Not that I would mind. Regards, Mogens
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.