Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:21:21 01/06/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 05, 2004 at 15:28:06, Uri Blass wrote: >On January 05, 2004 at 13:52:39, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On January 05, 2004 at 11:07:03, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On January 04, 2004 at 00:43:30, Ed Trice wrote: >>> >>>Hi Ed, >>> >>>It was my intention to stop posting in the amateur forum, >> >> >>Why don't you take your "non-amateur" stuff back to the forum for >>the "world's foremost authority on everything" (which has only one >>member of course, so you _never_ have to defend anything you post >>there) and leave the rest of us alone? > >I try to help him to do it. >I complained against his reply to you and I hope that he will be banned so he >will have no choice except stopping to post in this forum. > >His reply is a personal attack that has nothing to do with the subject or with >your reply. > >Uri Those that _can_ contribute _will_ contribute. Those that _can't_ contribute but want to, simply post nonsense and attack others. Notice that _every_ post of his casts aspersions on some program other than his. The typical case of his is "this is all about how good Diep is and how bad _all_ other programs are." I can still remember his tirades about how bad Chess Tiger was, yet he could hardly win a game. Of course he _always_ beat it "chanceless" in his matches in his basement (or wherever he held them). I logged on to ICC a couple of weeks ago while Slate was playing those handicap games. He said "Bob! Vincent is playing your machine using an 8-way Itanium box. you should see what he was saying in channel 64 earlier about Crafty." I just happen to always have crafty logging channel 64 tells to a file and I went back to look after Slate's urging. Vincent had said something like "I think I'll play using this machine without a book and beat up on Crafty for a few games." He went on to say a few other insulting things about Crafty, then he promptly played 5 games against my dual xeon, using (supposedly, no way to verify it) an 8-way Itanium box. He won 1 game and lost 4, and left without saying a _single_ thing. :) So yes, I get tired of that kind of nonsense. You would not believe the exchange of emails when he first started to work on a parallel chess program. 5+ per day, asking questions, and I answered _every_ one. Then he started to tell me why my approach would not work, when it did. Then he started on the performance issues, and how I had used a bad test set to get my 3.1x speedup. He sent a set that would kill Crafty's parallel speedup. It did. I only got a 3.0 speedup (4 cpus) for those position. This kind of nonsense went on for _months_. Always with the underlying theme of "This is what I _have_ to show my "sponsor" to get access to this big machine for a future WCCC event." You might call Peter Appleton-Jones, who was VP of Cray Research at the time I asked them to support my program. And ask him, or John Rollwagon (president and CEO at the time) exactly what _I_ promised to deliver. Answer "nothing" but some publicity and possibly some reasonable results. That was good enough for them. I didn't have to promise to win a tournament, or to produce better results than the chess 4.x guys on a CDC Cyber 176, etc. I just told them what I thought our chances were, and let it go at that. simple _honesty_. Something "someone" is sorely lacking. IE how can I fake my Crafty numbers? _anybody_ can test them, since the source is public. Many have duals, some have quads and beyond. It would have been hard to fake the CB numbers because CB was in the Cray User's group library for years, and most Crays around the world had a copy that people played with. So the _same_ problem would have shown up.
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.