Author: Uri Blass
Date: 06:20:45 03/05/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 05, 2004 at 09:15:50, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On March 05, 2004 at 09:09:51, Geert van der Wulp wrote: > >>On March 05, 2004 at 09:04:07, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On March 05, 2004 at 08:55:08, Daniel Clausen wrote: >>> >>>>On March 05, 2004 at 08:53:02, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>[snip] >>>> >>>>>You can also prove that you are better than some commercial programs if you are >>>>>really better than them >>>> >>>>Also? Your definition of "X being better than Y" probably doesn't match mine. ;) >>>> >>>>Sargon >>> >>>Uri as he says himself is more stupid than a 10 year old to understand that >>>other 10 year old can sometimes not change ini files nor does he see the logics >>>in that you do not proof to be better than Y when X is better than Z and there >>>is only the information that Y is better than Z. >> >>WRONG!! >>If X is better than Z, and Y is better than X, then it follows that Y is better >>than Z! > >Please read what i wrote: > X > Z > Y > Z > >Uri concludes from this that X > Y can be deduced which is not true. > >Your assumption is incorrect therefore. I did not get that conclusion. I only say Z is commercial and the programmer earns some money from it. X>Z X can be also commercial Uri Uri
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.