Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Rebel10's anti-GM revised...

Author: Bruce Moreland

Date: 17:35:43 06/30/98

Go up one level in this thread



On June 30, 1998 at 18:36:48, Will Singleton wrote:

>I think Ed has the right to market his program via this server.  I enjoy his
>marketing creativity, it enhances interest in chess programming.  If his anti-GM
>is part-hype, part real, that's fine.

I am not saying it should be prohibited, but I do think it should be done with a
lot of personal restraint.

I don't want to see this place turn into a place where we have daily countdowns
to the date a product ships.

>I'm sure we'll all be more interested in the exact implementation if he has a
>good result against Anand.  If there's a bad result, we won't care.

I don't care that much either way.  I'm not after Ed here because there is a
piece of specific knowledge that I want.  I don't think that a "hype" discussion
should be presented in the guise of a "technical" discussion though.

If you read through the technical responses this has gotten, there have been a
lot of guesses as to what Ed is talking about.  Is this how a thread should go
here?

If Ed wants to start a thread on this feature, then let's discuss the feature,
not make guesses about it.

>I expect a loss for Rebel against Junior tomorrow, if indeed anti-GM involves
>speculative (less than optimum) play.

I wouldn't expect too much from any one game no matter what Ed has done.  One
game doesn't validate a feature or cast significant doubt upon a feature.

I think people should just enjoy the game rather than turning it into some sort
of political struggle.

bruce



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.