Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Has Christophe's 0.01% chance actually occurred?

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 19:16:15 09/25/02

Go up one level in this thread


On September 25, 2002 at 20:34:04, pavel wrote:

>On September 25, 2002 at 20:08:05, Sune Fischer wrote:
>
>>On September 25, 2002 at 19:37:49, pavel wrote:
>>
>>>On September 25, 2002 at 19:22:00, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>I hope to see a better commercial program than Ruffian with a smaller
>>>>developement time in the future.
>>>>
>>>>Uri
>>>
>>>I hope to see that program to get much more respect than what Ruffian got by
>>>some of us.
>>>
>>>cheers,
>>>pavs
>>
>>You know the story of the boy who cried wolf, right.
>>
>>Well, when the word is out that a new super engine has been developed, by a
>>totally unknown and in (almost) no time, then that's just crying wolf to many
>>here. They've seen it, believed it, and been fooled more than once, so one would
>>have to be a bit of an idiot to take the bait over and over.
>>
>>Therefore you should forgive them if they don't exactly jump overboard with
>>excitement right away, they must be _sure_ first.
>>
>>But hey, all this fuzz is only because the engine is so very strong, the
>>programmer shouldn't take it as an insult but rather as a complement!
>>
>>(the guy is unknown they say, so it couldn't very well be personal)
>>
>>I think you may have a point that some are jealous, I know I am! (well maybe
>>envious is more accurate :).
>>But don't we all want to make stronger engines, and do it fast even!?
>>I certainly have no problems admitting that! ;)
>>
>>Though AFAIK, this isn't related to whether or not it is a clone debate.
>>
>>-S.
>
>Sune,
>      I still think some of the reactions has more to do with jealousy than
>sketicism. I mean if you look at the speculations (and some accusations) I
>listed in my previous post, and if you think about some of them, you will notice
>how dubiously far-fetched those speculations and accusations are.
>



No jealousy here whatsoever.  Just a healthy dose of skepticism, caused by
the old

   "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me..."

I've seen _way_ too many "new and wonderful" engines...  That turned out to
be neither...




>I would expect someone to take this is as an example, and work harder to improve
>his engine, not stratch their head and try to find faults that isn't there.
>
>IMO the previous clones were much too obvious, and clones are much too easy to
>catch in general.


And you don't think it possible that the "cloners" get more sophisticated?
Or do they remain with their very amateurish attempts forever?

Get realistic...




>
>cheers,
>pavs ;)



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.