Author: Uri Blass
Date: 12:49:25 04/30/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 30, 2001 at 15:15:37, Don Prohaska wrote: >On April 30, 2001 at 10:15:16, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On April 30, 2001 at 10:01:09, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On April 30, 2001 at 07:22:24, Alvaro Polo wrote: >>> >>>>Hello all, >>>> >>>>In a recent interview Kramnik states that "We are in a very interesting phase, >>>>when the strength of the best GMs and that of the best chess engines run by the >>>>best processors are about equal." >>>> >>>>I know that this point (machines being GM strenght or nor) has been debated >>>>again and again and I don't intend to post a troll. I would just like to know if >>>>the consensus now among chess programmers is wether Kramnik is right or not. For >>>>instance, I remember Bob Hyatt saying that computers are really 2450, etc. But >>>>software evolves, CPU power evolves and perhaps now there is agreement that >>>>machines are finally GM strenght? >>>> >>>>Thanks. >>>> >>>>Alvaro Polo >>> >>> >>>I personally think my estimate is still pretty close. Computers have two >>>serious problems: >>> >>>1. opening books. They depend on a human to "play the game" of choosing good >>>and bad openings. This leaves them highly vulnerable to opening preparation and >>>traps. Particularly when you practice against one copy and then play another >>>copy which doesn't have the 'learning' from the practice games. >> >>I think it is unfair to use this way to decide about the level of chess >>programs. >> >>I am more interested to know the results of programs when the opponent cannot >>get a copy of the program. >> >>When Deep thought and Deep blue played against humans the opponents could not >>get a copy of the program so I see no reason to let them to get a copy of the >>programs before the game. >> >>I think that letting the opponent to get a copy before the match should be >>allowed only after programs can prove that they can beat the best humans without >>giving them a copy before the match. >> >>Uri > >I've learned not to get into this stuff, but if the computer gets a copy of the >human (all his published games)why is it bad for the human not to get a peek at >the computer? I know! I should mind my own business. Getting games is not getting a copy of the human. Humans have a lot of secret preperation that they do not discover to their opponents. Uri
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.