Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:29:58 03/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 15, 2004 at 14:00:15, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >>-> the bottom line: >>perhaps you are onto something great, we will see. until then, i (and i believe >>many others here) prefer to think you are somewhere between slightly and stark >>raving mad with your project goals. AFAIK you have absolutely nothing to show up >>to now (lots of code, but i'd like to see some chess moves...). AFAIK your >>engine has yet to make it's first move. it is a mystery to me how you can first >>implement opening book and tablebase access before addressing the real problems >>in your approach. it is also a mystery to me how you can spend lots of time >>posting here about what your program will be able to do in the end, when it >>can't do anything right now. >> >>good luck - you will need it... >> martin > >I think Symbolic is an interesting project, simply because it is different. >Whether it works or (probably) doesn't work, it provides a new datapoint, and >perhaps some new perspective. However, Steven's *plans* for symbolic are not >nearly as interesting as his *results*, and the former has been much more >forthcoming than the latter. > >anthony Well, the good news is that Steven's last name is not Botvinnik. :) I suspect that he will eventually produce something, unlike the "Pioneer" project that produced reams of promises and faked results... :)
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.