Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 21:22:59 04/30/98
Go up one level in this thread
On April 27, 1998 at 18:47:53, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: >This is a very touchy subject, isn't it? I believe that Thoralf put it >succintly, rhetorically asking Ed that if he felt ignored, how could he >(Thoralf) could possibly feel. Therefore, regardless of the fact that >Ed is sincere about his motives, his motives are definitely pregnant >with unsound suspicion re the SSDF (meaning Thoralf Karlsson and a host >of anonymous Swedish testers)and Frans Morsch (read the ChessBase >company). Why all this? Isn't the pursuit of a good (perhaps the best >of all) program an artistic striving for truth, however tiny and >insignificant it may be? Why taint all this with presuppositions, >suspicions, bias, and, I must say this, blatant nonsense and half-lies? > >If Rebel 10 is as good as you say it is, why not let the Swedish testers >test it the way they usually do, painstakingly and honestly? If Nimzo98 >is number one, as some say, why not let it come out on the top by >playing hundreds of games? Why set up another "independent" testing >committee and split up the computer chess world? The whole project of >computer chess, with its magic holding its sway over all of us, should >stay out of it and try to pursue the tiny truths of chess, and the >essence (not so much the form or a couple of points more or less on the >SSDF list) of a program will most definitely be rightly judged by the >chess compuer fan, just as it is now. I am most certain that being >number 1 on the SSDF does not bring in as much financial gain as many >may think... Isn't this jumping the gun a bit? Who said there would be a new testing committee? My (totally uninformed) guess is that there will be something to replace Auto-232, maybe with a master machine that acts as a neutral party. Dave Gomboc
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.