Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 11:19:59 05/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 17, 2002 at 13:16:20, Robert Henry Durrett wrote: >On May 17, 2002 at 11:01:09, Russell Reagan wrote: > >>On May 16, 2002 at 20:34:49, Robert Henry Durrett wrote: >> >>>How to Improve Planning Ability of Engines? >> >>That's the question everyone would like to know the answer to, but no one (or at >>least no one that's going to tell) knows. > >Perhaps those who are creating chess software for profit would not wish to give >their competition any help. That would be understandable. But what about the >rest of the people posting here? I would have expected to see MANY THREADS >about this topic. After all, correcting the most important deficiency of >current chess software should be the first thing on everybody's minds! All of >the creative and free-thinking people here [i.e. everyone here]should be >presenting new ideas for discussion. Where is that discussion????? The point is that no one knows much about this. It's a catch-22. We don't know enough about it to discuss it, and so we don't discuss it because we don't know much about it. There are probably some very dedicated individuals here who have some ideas about this, but it's also highly likely that those individuals have commercial programs. If they are hard working enough to figure something out like this, something completely original, and talented enough to carry it through, then they probably already have a very strong chess program, and they aren't going to reveal their secrets to the public. People either don't know the answer to your question, or they know and they aren't going to tell you what you want to hear. Not only are they protecting their own program's "secrets" that make it a good program, but they probably spent a great deal of time working out such a system, and they are by no means going to give it away for free. It's like medicine. You could go around saying, "why isn't everyone giving away this medicine? it would make the world such a better place!" but the fact of the matter is that money and power are what runs the world. You're likely going to have to pay someone millions of dollars to get this information, or work it out and figure it out on your own. Russell >> >>>Will the new AMD and Intel 64-bit >>>microprocessors make possible programming techniques not currently possible and >>>thereby solve this problem? >> >>No, a 32-bit processor can do anything a 64-bit processor can do. Currently >>32-bit processors probably do it faster too, even though it takes twice as many >>instructions or more to accomplish the same thing. Eventually 64-bit computers >>will be faster though. It will just mean faster chess programs, that's all. > >I guess that's what they said about 32-bit when everybody was using 16-bit. > >> >>Russell > >Bob
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.