Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Deep Blues

Author: Rob Fatland

Date: 15:39:29 04/22/98


Dear Gang;
With the combination of the current opinion poll and the IBM
announcement I feel compelled to reiterate my main idea about
the Deep Blue phenomenon.  Please skip this post if you've heard
it before, or if you think IBM is a nifty company.

1. The Borg analogy is correct:  IBM *used* you, me, the entire chess
community, the entire computer community, their collective public
credibility, together with that of the DB research team, Joel Benjamin,
Garry Kasparov, David Robinson, and anyone else they could suck in
entirely for the purpose of making money.  The historical value of the
project has escaped their notice, and the result is a disgrace.

2. The disgrace is twofold:  First, that IBM did not then support the
Deep Blue project after the Kasparov match so that we could really
observe the machine and the chess play it would produce.  Instead, they
chopped it up and abandoned the project like a bunch of petulant
children.  No doubt Kasparov's immaturity contributed, but this was not
the deciding factor.  The deciding factor was greed.

3. The second disgrace is that nobody seems to object to being used in
this way.  This recent CCC opinion poll asks this nice hypothetical
question about Deep Blue's playing strength as if there were some match
pending against Fritz in a couple of weeks.  Let's face it:  IBM has
killed Deep Blue.  Deep Blue is not a real thing; it is nothing more
than an advertising gimmick, like the words `New and Improved' or the
Tidy Bowl Man.

4. Unless IBM or someone else revives the project in a legitimate way,
history will see Deep Blue as a late 20th century version of the Turk;
a chess playing automoton founded on deception.  All those CMU CS guys
who built careers on this project will appear to be nothing more than
your usual duped scientists and a bunch of rubes.

5. Therefore, I suggest we bury Deep Blue and forget about it (as we
avoid discussing the Tidy Bowl Man) and concentrate on what IBM was
pretending to do:  Make a legitimate computer chess program that is
capable of playing with the world's best.

Thankyou for your attention.  I am generally a pretty happy graduate
student who loves chess, but in some circumstances I am necessarily a
social critic as well.   -r



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.