Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 14:07:56 07/12/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 12, 2002 at 16:37:19, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On July 12, 2002 at 16:29:18, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On July 12, 2002 at 16:25:48, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>[snip] >>>If you leave maths and come back to chess, oops, the difficulties, deeper search >>>depth or not, do never stop IMO. Ed always was thinking the same. He never >>>believed in the doubling enthusiasm, and for good reasons. >> >>Are you sure that you are interpreting Ed correctly? > >Smile. I'm not officially introduced. But I'm sure Ed will comment on our >debate. BTW Ed never was impressed by the mere hardware ballyhoo of DBII. He >always asked for the games. But until now we don't have 'em. > >> >>By the time you have made a 60 ply search, if you have 15 plys of null move >>reduction, you will still see 45 plies full width. That will crush any human >>and play chess that we simply cannot imagine. > >I do not aggree. If you are talking about 'any' human. Some humans will always >be much more clever than a machine. Taking the actual paradigm of computerchess. >Of course that may change in the future - hopefully. :) I think you are wrong, but there can be no proof until far into the future. Checkers (for instance) is nearly solved. With the openings databases and endgame databases, they have nearly met in the middle. Eventually (maybe 10,000 years into from now) computers will have (for all practical purposes) solve the game.
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.