Author: Tapio Huuhka
Date: 14:33:53 06/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 23, 2001 at 06:34:43, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On June 22, 2001 at 14:41:23, Tapio Huuhka wrote: >>That's still an abstraction. The robot doesn't use "one hand" to perform moves, >>as stipulated by the FIDE rules. It uses just an artificial abstraction of a >>hand. A similar abstraction is the opening library used by this robot (in any >>form whatever) and it compares well with ECO volumes, for instance. Or does the >>creation of computer opening books differ much in principle from the creation of >>ECO? > >If people want to say that computers cheat or whatever, who cares. There's no >way around this, and that's the intent of people who say this. Fine, computers >cheat, because they can't grab a piece with their fingers, compose a sonnet, be >emotionally touched by a baby's smile, or go potty. Stipulated. I don't care. > >I think blind people cheat, too. Blind people shouldn't be allowed to play >chess unless they move the pieces themselves, and the touch move rule still >applies. And since they can't see the board, and they can't touch the pieces, >they have to figure out where their opponent moved by *sound* and *smell*. If >they can't do this, tough luck, because lord knows that the game of chess is >completely destroyed unless you reach out and touch the piece with your own >fingers. > >By the way, there are FIDE rules for blind people, and the computers play by >them. A blind person can have a person there who helps them move pieces, and >tells them where things have been moved. > >bruce Good comment. I wonder why you and Bob talk about cheating? So it's OK, if computers are treated as handicapped. I like it, too. And what about normal human players? The poor guys blunder or make other mistakes in every game. They can't even remember their preparation or home analysis OTB. So why shouldn't we treat them the same way as computers are treated -- as handicapped? Surely they are handicapped, if we compare them with computers. I mean, why not allow them to bring books and home analysis for memory aids, and even computers for blundercheck? The computer playing rules say: "The game shall be played according to FIDE Laws." And then there are the exceptions that don't say anything about sources of information, which are prohibited by the FIDE laws. The FIDE laws say: "The Laws of Chess cannot cover all possible situations that may arise during a game, nor can they regulate all administrative questions. Where cases are not precisely regulated by an Article of the Laws, it should be possible to reach a correct decision by studying analogous situations which are discussed in the Laws." To me it says, that if computers are allowed to bring their teams' home analysis (e.g. opening books and endgame tablebases) to the tournament, humans should be allowed to do the analogous thing and use the information they want. Or else ban it all. Take your pick, please, or explain what's wrong with this interpretation. Tapio
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.