Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 12:26:07 04/13/02
Go up one level in this thread
That's a slightly different topic. I didn't say "in ten years" but rather "within ten years." I agree that it's likely that computers will continue to improve and that someday no human will EVER be able to beat them. I don't know whether or not that will happen in ten years (I tend to think not, but this is not the issue here). What I predict is this: sometime between today and ten years from today, at least one strong human chess player will acquire the skills and techniques necessary to consistently outscore the top chess programs running on PCs. I am, of course, NOT 100% certain of this prediction, but I believe it to be over 50% likely. On April 13, 2002 at 14:55:14, Mark Young wrote: >On April 13, 2002 at 13:43:58, Roy Eassa wrote: > >> >>If someone were to handsomely pay 5 strong GMs (they need not be the 5 top GMs, >>but younger is better in this case) to spend 3 months (8 hours a day, weekdays >>only -- a regular job) with 5 very fast Athlon systems... >> >>...to come up with skills and techniques to dramatically improve their results >>against such programs as Fritz 7b, Chess Tiger 14, Gambit Tiger 2, Hiarcs 8, >>Junior 7, and Shredder 6 Paderborn... >> >>...and the GMs would share ideas and results... >> >>At the end of the 3 months, how much further would the art of anti-computer >>chess have evolved compared to where it is today? >> >> >>Is there NO chance that GMs who would go through an exercise like this could >>come out of it able to consistently beat today's top programs on today's fast >>PCs? >> >>Or can you can acknowledge that such GMs MIGHT (not 100% WOULD, not 100% >>WOULDN'T) acquire such a skill under such circumstances? >> >>Today's GMs, with their current set of skills and motivations, are indeed >>matched and often outdone by today's best programs running on fast PCs -- there >>is ample evidence of that! >> >>But how can one reasonably conclude that this fact RULES OUT the ability for >>smart people to study and develop new skills? >> >>I did not believe (as some did in the '70s and early '80s) that no computer >>would EVER consistently beat some GMs. And I do not believe now that no GM will >>EVER consistently beat computers. >> >>I hereby register my prediction that, within the next 10 years, a human player >>(most likely an IM or GM) will be able to consistently beat the top chess >>programs running on that day's fast PCs. >> >>Not EVERY IM/GM will acquire these skills, but I think it's over 50% likely that >>AT LEAST ONE will. > >In 2012 if the programmers still have a desire to keep programming new chess >computers, as there may not be any humans left to beat. I don't think any human >will be able to win a match against a chess computer. > >In truth there is no magic bullet for the human player. Chess is pure tactics >and as computers get faster, and programs improve. The few holes that programs >still have will get smaller and smaller. At current less then 100 people in the >world are stronger then the best programs. In 10 years I think the number will >be 0. The only better players will be other computer programs. > >As of now a success for a GM player using anti-computer tactics is when he locks >the position for a draw, not a win. Read GM Gluko's comments. > >In ten years who will be able to beat a computer at chess, no one. It will be >like racing a indy car for 500 mile on foot. No chance in hell for the human.
This page took 0.02 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.