Author: Albert Silver
Date: 16:40:01 08/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 07, 2002 at 18:13:06, Mig Greengard wrote:
>You are on to one of the new (?) directions in man-machine. Kasparov talked
>about this with me and a few other people in New York a few months ago. Since
>it's obviously only a matter of time before computers are invincible, the true
>test is whether or not a human can win ONE game, not a set match. That concept
>isn't being applied in this match, but he foresees that being the challenge in
>coming years. As long as humans can still win a game here and there, the quest
>will go on for chess programmers.
>
>Saludos, Mig
The quest may go on, but will there be many programmers running so hard after
it? After all, right now, it's still quite interesting to select different
engines because they are still within reach, however how good will sales be when
they are toppling 2600+ GMs 9 games in 10? Will the user really care about those
extra 20 Elo points boasted by the manufacturer if no one can really make a dent
in them before or after? I have my doubts personally. I don't think it will be
the death of the game or anything so dire, but as to engines it's hard to say.
There's time, but the horizon is looming IMO.
Albert
>
>
>On August 07, 2002 at 14:50:10, Rex wrote:
>
>>We find the two best GM's in the world verses the top Chess Programs on the
>>market. This should and will be the FINAL result in determining who is
>>stronger, Computers or Humans. If the match ends equally, the win goes towards
>>the computer, in my mind. These two GM's should_go_for_the_kill and NOTHING
>>less.....
>>
>>I only hope the GM's win. This will give HOPE for the Chess
>>programers/computers to work towards in the future. IF the computer wins...Its
>>over!!
>>
>>
>>Rex
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.