Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Maths can be dangerous! OT break for humanitarian reasons...

Author: Rolf Tueschen

Date: 14:48:21 01/28/03

Go up one level in this thread


On January 28, 2003 at 17:27:34, Rolf Tueschen wrote:

>On January 28, 2003 at 13:38:48, James T. Walker wrote:
>
>>On January 28, 2003 at 10:26:01, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On January 28, 2003 at 00:59:21, Terry McCracken wrote:
>>>
>>>>On January 27, 2003 at 22:57:21, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>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.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>1970:  in 10 years computers will be world champion (note this also
>>>>>happened in the 1950's and 60's).  Others said "will not".  "will too."
>>>>>"I'll bet xxx they won't."  And 10 years later the same argument still
>>>>>rages.
>>>>>
>>>>>1980:  In 10 years computers will be unbeatable.  Will not.  Will too.
>>>>>
>>>>>It will probably _always_ be "another ten years".  Reminds me of the Tom Hanks
>>>>>Movie "The Money Pit."  "How long until my house is fixed?"  "two more weeks".
>>>>>Week after week...
>>>>>
>>>>>:)
>>>>
>>>>Well, eventually it will happen, it's only a "matter of time", Bob;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>Yes, but I'm not sure I like the "time".  When I walked into my first calculus
>>>course as a college freshman in 1966, the professor asked "If you stand 4 feet
>>>from the wall, and step 1/2 the way to the wall, and then step 1/2 way again,
>>>will you _ever_ reach the wall?"  Of course, most said "no" and we dove into
>>>limit theory that proves that if you have "enough time" you will eventually get
>>>there, as the limit of 1/2^n is zero as n reaches infinity.
>>
>>The problem with that theory is that 1/2^n has about as much chance of reaching
>>zero as n has of reaching infinity.  I see neither one as practical but then I'm
>>not an educated man.  But I'm sure nobody in your calculus class will live long
>>enough to reach the wall.
>>Jim
>
>Just to mention what our Terry from CFT has forgotten, but that isn't a wonder
>if you consider the injury, Terry got, when he did what his professor told him
>to do, a terrible concussion! Terry, poor Terry boy, I even called him kid, had
>a serious head injury, and we in CTF still must suffer with every little message
>from "him". Let's show some compassion and let me in special apologize for being
>so "rude" to "him" in his "view". I promisse that I will applaude his very
>personal poems from now on. Isn't there some distant music even in such a short
>masterpiece as "loon!" what seems a favorite of Terry's?
>
>Inconsolable,
>
>Rolf Tueschen, with a serious hip injury due to doing the splits while testing
>the length of the number Pi! :(

Omigod! I missed it! It wasn't Terry, it was Bob! Excuse me, Bob, I had the
sequence of the moves wrong! Ecxuse me. :)

Rolf Tueschen


>
>
>>
>>>
>>>I hope that is not the target we have with computers and GM players.  :)



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.