Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:51:41 11/12/98
Go up one level in this thread
On November 12, 1998 at 18:55:29, Ed Schröder wrote: >>I have no idea *what* is at the root of this. The "junior" issue was obviously >>a sore point as it was discussed a good while back. Can you think of something >>other than "personal" that would account for such a stupid article that was >>based on really poor research (the stock gain) and on outright dishonest and >>misleading journalism (avoiding computer events that never were a possibility)? > >>So no, I don't want to change the topic... but I would like to know what is >>driving this "deep blue hatred." Did you consider that article complimentary >>or insulting? Factual or misleading? Technically accurate or wishful thinking? >>And what might lead someone to write something so obviously biased? Almost has >>to be personal. I never understood the name "fight". In the US "junior" has >>a unique meaning everywhere, typically "younger or weaker or smaller or >>something like that when compared to the original." And in that regard, DB >>junior made a lot of sense. We played a few events using a "Cray Blitz junior" >>in fact, such as the 1984 US Speed Chess Championship. We couldn't get a real >>4 processor XMP, so we ran on a special-edition single processor (a machine >>designed to be cheaper than a normal cray) with a slower clock than normal and >>slower memory (2x slower) than normal. Harry coined the name "Cray Blitz >>Junior" and everyone knew what it meant. I fail to see how doing that would >>incur the wrath of someone. But the "hatchet job" (to borrow Bruce's quote) >>was exactly that. And the question is "why?" I wouldn't write something like >>that about *any* program here. I do my best to be complimentary. I haven't >>seen you do such stuff either. So does it strike you as a little odd? Does >>me... > >>And I learned many years ago, nearly *everything* has a "reason". Even Albert >>Einstein didn't believe that anything was random. I tend to agree... > >>Bob > >>(hope that clears up where I come from) > >Yes you clearly made your point :( > >I saw an article. It contains statements I agree and disagree on. We talk >about its contents. I have seen nothing "personal" (as you say) or "Deep >Blue hatred". > more on this below... >I also think "Deep Blue hatred" does not exists. It's an invention of yours. Maybe I am getting too old to be *clear* in my writing. I hope you didn't sense that I was talking about *you*. I was, in this case, talking specifically about Amir/Shay. If you look at the tone of the article... if you look at the tone of previous posts (last year) by Amir... rather than simply say "I don't see anything here..." he says "this needs an explanation by IBM". And other such statements... they are most definitely personal. At least I can tell you that the DB guys think they are personal. And others that have communicated via email with me think they are personal... But *not* by you... >The fact that we discuss Deep Blue here doesn't mean we hate it. Like >it or not we have the right to discuss Deep Blue here and you have no >right to label things as "personal" towards Amir and Shay. Next I don't >like that you label people (for this occasion Amir and Shay too) as "Deep >Blue haters" if they disagree with you (or have another opinion) on a >Deep Blue related issue. > They are the only ones I pointed this finger at. Reread Shay's "article". Would *you* write that and publish it? Would you make that assinine statement about their "carefully avoiding computer vs computer events after losing to Fritz, *knowing* there were *no* computer vs computer events held after 1995? You get the drift... That was a direct insult, pointed right at deep blue and the team behind it. I can see two reasons: (1) anger over the "name" issue. (2) jealousy over their accomplishments (aren't we all, but most of us don't try to tear them down to build ourselves up). I'd gladly accept another explanation... and I have asked specifically for one. But none has been forthcoming... only more discussion about the output for Kasparov and the like. That last paragraph was insulting and libelous. The first paragraph made the author look like an idiot. Unless it was taken out of context and was intended as some sort of sattire or spoof... (stock price gains 20% by winning a chess match...) Sorry that this sounds angry... but this type of "butcherknife journalism" won't go ignored by me. Any more than I'd let Rolf make his accusations about you in r.g.c.c.. I don't defend *you*... I defend what I believe to be your *character*. I do the same for Hsu and Campbell (and the rest)... I *know* those guys... have had many face-to-face conversations with them. I've never seen you personally... yet I'd defend you both against such unsubstantiated nonsense... Hope you understand, even if you don't agree... Bob >- Ed -
This page took 0.01 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.