Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 14:07:10 08/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
As I recall, the original stipulation was $5 million per person. It was a made-up number, intended to reflect an amount of money large enough to get the programmer to fully reveal all his algorithms, evaluation weightings, etc. If you prefer, user $100 million per programmer. Or whatever. )I'm not offering anything -- it was purely hypothetical!) On August 27, 2001 at 15:59:42, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On August 27, 2001 at 13:07:31, Roy Eassa wrote: > >>On August 27, 2001 at 12:03:53, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On August 26, 2001 at 14:18:27, Roy Eassa wrote: >>> >>>Ok let's be clear here. I've been on several tournaments now and >>>what i have learned about technical things from Stefan Meyer Kahlen >>>in all those years is summarized in the next few new lines, which is >>>about what the other 2 persons would learn too: >> >> >>The theory here is that $5,000,000 might just loosen those tight lips -- no say, >>no pay. > >All of the programmers share probably that they tried loads of different >algorithms. Nowadays i already see in advance that something is usually >not going to work, but if i would sum up what i have tried over the >years that's already a lot, not to mention guys like Stefan, Frans >etc. > >In short they could write books full of crap for that $5MLN without >saying a thing. > >Also i think $5MLN divided by 3 persons is 1.6M, if you need to >live the rest of your life from 1.6M then that's pretty little money >to open your mouth! > >>We could just substitute another top author -- does Marty Hirsch still >>have lots of unique knowlege? (And I really wasn't trying to invite attacks on >>individuals.) > >I'm not attacking any individual at all, i'm just saying >that the combination of persons you mgiht want to is not going to >reveal much for $1.6M > >(ah that was a bad bummer for you?) > >The persons that would show you every byte of their >source code for 1.6M$ are not the guys you want, unless you >go for promising programmers who have still have to make name. > >I definitely think that Marty Hirsch is a founder of computerchess, >one of the great hero's from the past. > >Nowadays software is so much better than software from the past. > >The number of testers in computerchess that give programmers ideas >you can count them all on 2 hands. > >Note that just 1 idea a year is also not going to work if the number >of testers is that small. > >If i would have had to make a team my own i would be definitely inside, >as i'm a chessprogrammer AND i can play chess. For implementation in >assembly you need a smart guy like Frans Morsch, he'll give >extra speed for free and he can make the search superb. > >For superb testing and fine tuning and focussing on the right plan >in the position you get on the board i'd take Stefan. > >A strong bookmaker is definitely required. I would have hard problems >picking either Jeroen Noomen or Alexander Kure. > >But well, if all details of such a project are going to get revealed, >like source code, and book given free, > >I'm not so sure whether you can get all that for $5M only in that case. >Would put a zero behind it to be sure. > >$5M is not so much if you need to split it. > >Also what most people overlook is that the programmer itself is >a crucial man but for scoring not always the most crucial. > >A crucial part is the guy making a book too nowadays, and also crucial >is the testteam the programmer has collected around him. > >Oh i forgot, i would also take Amir, to just get lucky at the worldchamps... > >Best regards, >Vincent
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.