Author: Jorge Pichard
Date: 01:23:30 01/28/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 27, 2003 at 19:22:19, andrew tanner wrote: > There seems to be no basis for this belief other than DEEP BLUE and it's >legacy, which is a legacy of "the sky is falling" type of despair. If computers >continue to improve tactically, then GM's will learn from them and also improve >tactically. Man has always improved in everything he does. Accelerated rates of >improvement for chess computers with faster hardware or knowldege doesn't >automatically translate into wins against strong GM's. Bring it on. > > -A.T. As Kasparov himself said, it will only be a few years before computers will routinely beat the top chess players, and these sort of man vs. machine tournaments will be a thing of the past. Chess programs are often referred to as being artificially intelligent, which I think is simply incorrect--it's all number crunching, no AI involved at all. Now if a computer could beat a Go master, that would impressive. Go has way more possibilities to it, making it impossible (so far) for a computer to play by brute force. There is a standing $2 million dollar prize for writing the first computer program to beat a Go master. Pichard
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.