Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:15:25 03/03/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 03, 2004 at 19:03:22, Johan de Koning wrote: >On March 02, 2004 at 23:17:02, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On March 02, 2004 at 21:14:16, Albert Silver wrote: >> >>>On March 02, 2004 at 05:57:16, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>> >>>>On March 02, 2004 at 02:18:30, Johan de Koning wrote: >>>> >>>>>On March 01, 2004 at 16:18:55, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On March 01, 2004 at 14:06:56, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>It's ironic that with the advent of fast, stable, commodity interconnectivity, >>>>>>>and the development of tried-and-tested automation interfaces, that the >>>>>>>so-called "world championship" has only gotten slower, longer, more expensive >>>>>>>and more colloqial. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Once again, the most awesome power on earth (stupidity) triumphs over >>>>>>>technology. >>>>> >>>>>>It seems that it always does. :) >>>>> >>>>>But you can change the world, if you want to! >>>>> >>>>>Just start by celebrating Thanksgiving and Christmass through phone and e-mail. >>>>>Soon you will discover that the possibilites are almost unlimited. Students will >>>>>pick it up quickly of course, and the class rooms can be turned into a >>>>>profitable asset. Within a decade the rest of the world will follow, and lower >>>>>Manhattan can be turned into a profitable theme park. >>>>> >>>>>But then again, what's the point of a theme park if everyone get their kicks on >>>>>the super highway? >>>>> >>>>>... Johan >>>> >>>> >>>>You can change the world but not the general stupidity of man. Look, by all >>>>means certain people are trying to claim that making money to feed a family is >>>>of similar value than gambling in a 11 round Championship with the leading progs >>>>playing much weaker opponents in the last rounds. The next step is the claim >>>>that such gambling pays off for the leading programmers in a similar manner than >>>>holding classes in universities. Then the final point is that actually gambling >>>>is the central key point, while formerly it was a hobby for academics in their >>>>spare time at the weekends. A bit this reminds me of the many academic drop-outs >>>>who see their drinking habits and other hobbies on the same level as serious >>>>research activities at universities. But again, you can't change the general >>>>stupidity of man. >>>> >>>>Rolf >>> >>>I think you missed his point Rolf. Johann was saying that although it is >>>perfectly possible to do the competition on the Internet, just like one could >>>theoretically celebrate Thanksgiving or Christmas only online as well, it isn't >>>the same experience as doing it live. >>> >>> Albert >> >> >>That is still apples/oranges. >> >>A tournament is first about the games, and that is just as effective over the >>net as it is in person, > >Well sure, if you limit the importance of a tournament to its games >(or even the results), it is pointless to have a "physical" event. >Duration and location are also not an issue then. physical events are fine. We call those "conferences". :) They do _not_ last two weeks, however... 2-3 or even 4 days is just fine, but _not_ two weeks... > >>Holidays are first about getting together with family. >> >>The "irony" is non-existent IMHO > >With increasing connectivity the 'life' in 'IRL events' is getting *more* >important, not less. Internet pioneers knew that a long time ago. Some >people still don't know it and assume technology is meant to deprive us >from such events. That's the irony. > >... Johan You _can_ do both. Frequent/long tournament events. Short conferences to discuss algorithms, etc... Events on the net. Conferences up close and personal.
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.