Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: slandering of companies

Author: Larry Proffer

Date: 06:33:26 05/18/01

Go up one level in this thread


On May 18, 2001 at 08:42:16, Jeroen van Dorp wrote:

>>I do see many complaints against specific companies. I believe many of these
>complaints are faked.
>
>
>Okay, sorry, I misunderstood your somewhat fuzzy message.
>This is more clear.
>
>By responding to Melvin Schwartz somewhat whining message about Rebel support
>you suggest this Melvin Schwartz or whoever he is is probably trying to
>discredit Rebel.

No, I can't say that. I don't have any way to tell one way or the other because
my information is limited.

Go get out your AI textbook. Read about traffic light control systems and fuzzy
logic (a usual example). There's a signal from the 'pedestrian waiting'
detector. Possibilitities are that there's a pedestrian waiting, or that the
detector is faulty. Fuzzy logic is to do with the control system that tries to
deal with these possibilities by ascribing probabilities to them, etc.

Like, if the 'pedestrian waiting' detector is on for a long the time (or off for
a long time), then the probability that the detector is broken increases.

Firing an automatic message off to the engineers to come out is going to get
done on a subjective probability basis. Fuzzy logic.

My subjective fuzzy logic fired on that specific post. This is not a reflection
on that post, but on the pattern of posts from various posters in the past.


>He isn't complaining about something he doesn't receive - namely support -  but
>he's complaining to discredit the Rebel Company.

I can't say that MS is doing that. He might be doing that, and he might not. The
situation is fuzzy.

Fuzzy logic is about probabilities.

If something of low probablity interpretation in each specific case keeps
happening - then the probability *overall* supporting the theory that there is a
'campaign' increases.

>
>Bruce *is* right you know -  why don't you say so?

Because it doesn't mean that specific cases are necessarily part of the pattern.

I said there was a pattern, not that this specific case was necessarily part of
it.

>
>J.



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.