Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 18:56:16 03/15/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 14, 2001 at 21:52:57, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>On March 14, 2001 at 16:58:52, Andrew Dados wrote:
>
>>I think chess can be easily mistaken for a complex problem while it is not. As
>>you pointed most advances over last years were done thanks to speed increase
>>rather then software.
>>
>>In a problem where full information is available your move is determined; you
>>don't make 'decisions' or 'choices'. That is somehow obvious to me, however I
>>fail to create good set of arguments to back up my point that chess programs are
>>showing no intelligence.
>>
>>However if you call chess program intelligent exact same reasoning applies to
>>program playing 3x3 tic-tac-toe. Computation cost of solving a deterministic
>>model does not make a solution to it more 'intelligent', imo.
>
>I contend that the problem has to be sufficiently difficult before you can
>identify that quality (intelligence) in any decently large degree.
>
>bruce
Why do you need this artificial constraint?
Just assume that intelligence is a continuum (spelling?) of degrees, that's much
simpler and widens its scope, so you can escape from anthropomorphism.
Christophe
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.