Author: Uri Blass
Date: 03:00:04 08/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 19, 2002 at 05:34:22, David Dory wrote: >On August 19, 2002 at 02:57:36, Russell Reagan wrote: > >>The argument goes both ways... >> >>Kasparov is special because he has proven his ability over decades. The same can >>not be said for Deep(er) Blue. Until the machine proves it's ability to beat the >>best consistently, it's not to be deemed better than the best humans. The >>machine and it's supporters either need to "put up or shut up". Since the >>machine isn't scheduled to be playing anytime soon, I guess it's time to shut up >>:) >> >>"Simple as that." >> >>Russell > >DB2 beat the human world champ - and * please * don't even THINK about >"statistical validity". It's a MATCH, not a statistical study!! > >In the Olympics, you run your marathon race ONE time, just one. That decides who >wins, who loses. Easy as pie! If you run the 100 meter dash in 8.0 seconds, you >set the world record! Yes but in chess like in tennis there is no world record. You cannot say that you are the best only because you were the best in 1997. Top programs of today cannot play against kasparov of 1997 so the only way to compare is if deeper blue and the top programs play against the same players (kasparov of today and kasparov of 1997 are not considered by me to be the same). Deeper blue does not play and I do not thing that the thing deserves respect for not playing. Uri
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.