Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:05:57 04/01/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 31, 2001 at 04:49:05, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On March 30, 2001 at 09:51:47, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >[snip] > >>But let's approach it from how IBM will approach it. It will be >>a business decision, and those decisions are usually taken by managers >>who probably never heart of the 'en passant' rule (i'm not implying >>that most readers of CCC therefore know the rule). >> >>Managers think in terms of numbers. The number is quite convincing >>to NEVER ever again let Deep Blue live when it is interesting to let it >>play. It's obvious that in 2001 programs are hell better now as in 1997. >> >>Like any commercial program of today will beat the hell out of this deep >>blue thing. If it's not book, then it's because of pawn structure, if it's >>not because of that, then it'll be exchanging some crucial pieces in the >>middlegame etcetera. >> >>However this is all of no concern of business men. They see a 37 billion >>dollar risk. > >It's not a 37 billion dollar risk; that's complete lunacy. > >What they got out of DB was the impression in a lot of people's minds that IBM >had created a machine that was stronger than the best human on earth. This >impression has some value. It's a nebulous sort of value. It's the idea that >people might be more likely to have a warm fuzzy feeling about IBM and buy their >stuff over someone else's. The value is not equal to 20% of the value of the >company (the market cap is $169B). That's just insane. > >If they lose another match, to either a computer or a human, they will lose the >prestige value. If they win, they will retain it. It's stupid from a financial >viewpoint to risk a lot without having anything to gain. So I agree with your >conclusions about why it won't play, I just think your math is crazy. > >bruce What IBM got out of the match was _lots_ of free publicity on every TV/Radio/ newspaper/magazine/etc in the world. It was simply "good exposure". There is no way to "take that exposure back". The previous result could be "tainted" by a loss of course. But I agree that all that would be lost is a bit of mystical aura... not part of the company. People buy (today) from IBM because they are IBM with a strong service and support reputation. Not because they beat Deep Blue. Deep Blue just got their name in front of a _lot_ more people. They decided to "quit while they were ahead". There is little we can do about it except to wish it had not happened... I would almost be willing to bet that if they played a 3rd match, that just playing the match would generate enough publicity to offset any possible negative impression should they lose that match.
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.