Author: Robert Henry Durrett
Date: 16:40:27 06/03/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 03, 2002 at 18:23:58, Roy Eassa wrote: > >When I use a computer chess program to help me analyze and get at the truth >about a position, I want the program to have every possible advantage, including >a huge opening book, EGTBs, a large database of games, whatever will help it >analyze better. > >But when a computer plays a match against a human, should the expectations be >different? Should then additional matters of "fair play" come into >consideration? > >Clearly this is a very divisive issue. > >The purpose of this post was simply to point out that one MIGHT draw a >distinction between what's fair/good to have when you're using the computer as a >TOOL and what's fair/good to have when the computer is playing against somebody >in a GAME. > >(A corollary question: We all know humans can cheat -- for example by consulting >an opening book during a game. Is there anything a computer could do that >should be considered cheating?) Well, if it's not OK for humans to get help from computers during human tournaments, then the same standards should apply for computer tournaments. In other words, requesting and then receiving help from humans DURING play of the game would be "cheating." But it makes no sense to punish innocent computers, since they do not know right from wrong. It would be like spanking a baby for peeing in his/her diaper. Morality issues do not apply to computers. Human morals and rules are for humans. Computers are exempt because a computer cannot knowingly cheat. Not, that is, unless you consider computers to be sentient beings acting independently and voluntarily. If they were, then it would be possible for them to cheat. Maybe some day that time will come! Bob D.
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.