Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 20:04:52 08/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 07, 2002 at 19:40:01, Albert Silver wrote: >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 I don't think it will be as bad as people think. For example, look at checkers. The best checkers programs pretty much whipe the floor with any human since Tinsley died, but people are still actively developing their engines. Of course, computer vs. GM matches probably won't be as interesting in the future, but as one GM said (can't remember his name), we have cars but we still watch people run races. I think computers will be used as more of a learning tool in chess in the future. At some point when humans are absolutely no match for computers, there will be rampant cheating, and chess will probably die, or at least become a joke at the top level. On the other hand, everyone cheats at the top levels in the majority of professional sports, and those are still very popular. I don't know if chess will be the same though, because it's not as marketable as a spectator sport. Russell
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.