Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 20:10:01 05/24/98
Go up one level in this thread
On May 24, 1998 at 19:06:38, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >>In the end it remains: counting beans. > >Games, Thorsten, games... 1-0, 0.5-0.5, 0-1. As we all do, no? including >FIDE, PCA... In the end, chess is about winning, remember? :) > >Enrique a * ( b + c) = a*b + a*c <=> i throw a coin AND (it shows number OR it shows head) <=> (i throw a coin AND it shows number) OR (i throw a coin AND it shows head). This is your kind of logic. Coin shows number (1-0), head (1-0) or the coin is on the edge (very rare, but happens from time to time = 1/2). You believe I am pro fritz (1-0) or I am against fritz (0-1) or I don't say what I think. You believe I am biased pro fritz (1-0) or I am biased against fritz (0-1) or i don't say what i think. You believe I love fritz (1-0) or I hate fritz (0-1) or I don't say what i think. a * (b+c) = your kind of perspective about the world. But my world is not that kind of deterministic. I can critisize Fritz although I don't hate fritz. I can like 3 out of 4 fast searchers, BECAUSE they play good chess. When do you learn that YOU have this kind of logic in YOUR mind, and that I don't work in this deterministic way. My mind does not use this 3 stages point of view about the world. Even Newton learned to forget about physics and studied hebraic and wrote some really near coming comments and stuff about light-particle and god. Determinism alike the one you and your friends use is ONE kind of logic. It is an old kind of. It produces binary trees and (here Mr.Mader was right) manichaic religions. But those days are history. Today we know that there is another kind of logic. And this logic teaches us a different point of view. what you call FACTS is not the real world. It is a projection of your logic. You think that anything you do out there is objective, including the RESULTS you have. You and moritz speak about 100 %. As if there would ever be 100 % in the real world. Even in maths it is clear that a " <=> " is no indicator for NOT changing the formula that. if you do enough <=> operations, you suddenly get 1=0 instead of the starting 1=1. You believe anything is deterministic and you would only have to count the numbers and your result would be 100 % true and nothing can change this, right ? Anything is a big machine. Tarrasch knows WHICH moves are BEST moves and it is just a question of time until your brute-force-computer has backtraced the whole chess-search tree or Ken Thompson published a new quantum-32-stone-cd and you could easily tell me: this move is lost in 106 and this move is a draw in 302. I don't want to stop you from BELIEVING this. YOu live in a 2-dimensional world. And you oversee that there is >=1 dimension more to find out about. In your world Fritz5 is the strongest chess-program. And I do hate it. And therefore any critics against the ssdf is just a mean campaign. The fact that i always fought that they should not count the doubles or that they always should try to equal the platform, comes never in your mind. Where were you when i criticised them many many years before ? And how can you come after years, and explain to me that my request for fair-competition in the past was only a big campaign, launched years before fritz was build. Looks much like I would have a 10 years-plan. Where was your critics when they threw the Schaetzle + Bsteh TurboKit out of the list, since MM4 (or was it rebel5.0 module) was to dangerous for Mephisto 680x0 soandso ? I guess this was only my preparation for the real fight against Fritz5. Where have you been 1986 when Dieter and Fred made their internal-jokes about Thomas Nitsche holding a speech and trying to explain the non-listeners about how he would like to do a chess-program. And they shaked their head and called him crazy. And Ossi Weiner - in the same event, the same evening, explaining to the public WHY he had to lie about Mephisto III, and that this was an EASY thing to do, since it was a commercial need to do so. Maybe i should stop talking to people like you. Maybe what my friends say is true. One can only wait until an old paradigm dies. You cannot convince people like John Eric Sidney Thompson. "for, try as we may, we cannot get behind appearance of things to reality. And the terrible reason may be that there is no reality in things apart from their appearances." "Der Teufel hole sie und die Statistik!"
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.