Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 08:58:58 07/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 16, 2002 at 11:23:09, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 16, 2002 at 10:02:42, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On July 16, 2002 at 09:18:38, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On July 16, 2002 at 04:55:43, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>> >>>>On July 15, 2002 at 19:32:18, James T. Walker wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 15, 2002 at 12:27:17, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On July 15, 2002 at 12:09:51, James T. Walker wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On July 15, 2002 at 09:38:23, K. Burcham wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Websters: "to make a person believe what is not true". "to be false". >>>>>>>>"deliberate misinterpretation of facts". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>What do you think Kasparov means by "deceive the public". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Kasparov On losing to Deep Blue: >>>>>>>> "The Deep Blue match is the one people remember. >>>>>>>> It was not just a personal defeat but a disaster for chess. We allowed a >>>>>>>> computer giant to steal the result and deceive the public". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=410 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>kburcham >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I think Kasparov was implying that the Deep Blue team cheated. He simply could >>>>>>>not accept the fact that the computer beat him fair and square. There is no >>>>>>>medicine that can cure a bruised ego when it is world class in size. >>>>>>>Jim >>>>>> >>>>>>If that would be the case, we wouldn't have to face the situation that GM >>>>>>players have excluded CC from human tournament chess. They all agree with >>>>>>Kasparov that it wasn't DEEP BLUE2's strength alone. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Absolute nonsense! "They all agree" ???? They can't all agree on ANYTHING. >>>>>Also GM players have not excluded computers from human chess tournaments. Where >>>>>did you get that info? GM players as a group can't agree on the time of day. >>>>>Jim >>>> >>>>Such hip-hop makes no sense. You were talking about a "bruised ego". Are you a >>>>psychiatrist? If not, then you might understand what I was talking about. Do you >>>>challenge me and think that there is _no_ evidence for what I've written? If >>>>yes, then let me give you three hints. >>>> >>>>1) Unzicker a famous German GM, BTW more famous than all the ex-Soviet GM in the >>>>USA together, spoke it out, what I wrote above. >>>> >>>>2) GM at the Dutch Championship denied to play FRITZ with different variations >>>>of boycott. >>> >>>Only a couple. Not "all"... >> >>Right, I didn't write "all". >> > >You did say "they all agree ..." By tacit approval. But here in point 2 I said "GM". But it's just about words. There are no proofs. I count 1 and 1 together, you know. :) > > > > >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>3) The resolution of FIDE about machines in top event and also team >>>>championships. >>>> >>> >>>What about the "resolution" 10 years ago that computers could play if >>>they coughed up $10,000 to FIDE for membership? Nobody did because it >>>was too much money. So FIDE rescinded the option, probably hoping that >>>one day they would get asked again to open that back up and make some >>>money. >> >>It's always a problem to compare times, different centuries and the people >>involved in each case. It becomes quickly a multi-factor design. >> >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>Mathematically we still have no 100% but we have _more_ than "absolutely" >>>>nothing. ;) >>> >>> >>>Actually you have "very few". I don't even think "most GMs" have given the >>>question any thought since it isn't an issue in FIDE events. >>> >> >>You'd find silent majorities wherever you look. I don't understand why you still >>think that relations between chessplayers and CC aren't a bit legless these >>days. >> > >"a bit legless" doesn't explain what you mean here... This is difficult to explain and I don't want to insult anyone. Let's put it this way. Let me quote Guy Hayworth. He said that if '97' would have held in Britain, nobody in the population would have thought that the event had proven that computers from now on are better than human chessplayers. Let me add my own opinion. The chess of the machine did not beat Kasparov but ... etc. I think you also talked about the psyche. Now, it's simple to demonstrate where the IBM team made the mistakes. Ok, and here we have the cultural problem again. It's not only about science but also fair play. Could you agree that a machine may do many things, but a machine never could psych out a human master. Ok, you can say it was about chess. But I am saying, that chess is not only the game scores, it's also about the ambience and the relation between a human team with their computer and the top act, the human chessplayer. A super GM. Actually the best performer on Earth. You know, Kasparov simply was not prepared that someone of the _team_ showed him little respect. Ok, now you can say that this was not part of the contracts. Good argument! But then I am saying that such a view is typical for the cultural difference between fair play from Britain and 'Winning by all means, if needed also winning ugly' in America. And that statement should not be understood as insulting. Others have made this point, I am just the reporter. If you look at science, we find the same ethics and methodology. You simply get no sound results if you influence or let be disturbed your testing partner or client. So, in the first row it's about methodology to create a friendly atmosphere. But then it's about ethics too. No matter how dirty your client might behave somewhere else. A result in science is worth nothing, if you let happen a bad twist to the general climate. Ok, now you can say, but we have had no science, these guys were working for IBM and that's about money. Then I am saying that it was about sports as well, and fair play is a universal law which can't be overruled by any commercial company. Ok, you could say, but the USA is above the Law, see "our" rejection of the ICC and our call for immunity. Then I am saying, ok, Bob, I understand you, but why you couldn't win against Germany in the soccer Wch? Why didn't you order that Germany let you win... You would have had the right to do that... So we became friends in the end and if we are still alive we.... Rolf Tueschen
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.