Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:25:12 05/19/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 19, 2004 at 11:59:19, Uri Blass wrote: >On May 19, 2004 at 11:24:41, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On May 19, 2004 at 10:38:08, Matthew Hull wrote: >> >>>On May 19, 2004 at 10:30:22, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On May 19, 2004 at 10:25:05, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 19, 2004 at 10:09:29, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On May 19, 2004 at 09:57:04, Daniel Clausen wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On May 19, 2004 at 07:27:00, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On May 19, 2004 at 03:35:39, Daniel Clausen wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On May 19, 2004 at 03:02:05, Russell Reagan wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>[snip] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>That is the goal of the WCCC, to have a competition between the best >>>>>>>>>>computerized chess playing entities, not to test which software is the >>>>>best. >>>> >>>>>>>>>Yes, but strictly speaking this would mean that a company selling program >>>>>XYZ >>>>wouldn't be allowed to write WCCC2004 winner on their software >>>package, >>as it >>>>was not the software but software+hardware which actually >>>won the >>tournament. >>>> >>>>>>>>>Sargon >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>This is a nonsense of course. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Let me rephrase it: when you play a tournament like WCCC, where the pair >>>>>HW/SW >>is tested and your particular HW/SW combination wins, then it's not >>>>>"correct" to >>silently skip the HW part and just claim your SW part won. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I guess you still think it's nonsense. If so, you're welcome to be a bit >>>more >>>>specific and say _what exactly_ is nonsense about it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Sargon >>>>>> >>>>>>You really are overrating hardware. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>This is uniquely true of DIEP. No matter if it runs on a 90 mhz machine or a >>>>>400cpu x 500mhz supercomputer, it plays consistently at the FM level -- a >>>feat >>of programming mastery unequaled in the annals of computer chess. >>>>> >>>>>However, it would be a mistake to assume other projects are as well >>>engineered. > >>>>Why not show up at world champs operating crafty? >>> >>> >>>Crafty does not need an operator. Crafty incorporates features of automation >>>which permit it to play entire tournaments without human intervention. Since >>>Omid says that internet access is available at the event, all you have to do is >>>connect to ICC with free software. Then you and the other participants will >>>have the chance play the winner of the latest Internet World Computer Chess >>>Championship. >>> >>>BTW, where was DIEP at the last IWCCC? I guess the programmer didn't think he >>>could win. >> >>At saturday i played a game for my team (www.schaakclubutrecht.nl). A fide rated >>game 40 in 2 + 20 in 1 + 30, but i'm sure you have not a f'ing idea what i talk >>about here, and at sunday i played for my belgium club Hoboken at 40 in 2 + 1 >>(also FIDE rated of course, all important leagues are FIDE rated). >> >>So i had no time for a small internet tournament where the level is not even >>serious. 45 10 at my dual k7 means after a few moves like 30 seconds a move. >> >>This at 2 x 2.127Ghz. Let's say that's 0.5 * 2 * 2127 Mhz = 2127 Mhz minute. >> >>At world champs 1999 the chessbase top played at 4x500Mhz at 3 minutes a move. >>So that's 6000Mhz minute. >> >>How can one take an internet tournament serious where the level+hardware is for >>sure slower than what was the standard in 1999? >> >>Also if there is commercial interests in a tournament at the internet, then >>curious things will happen. Additionally there is hardly programmers interesting >>enough to chat to at such CCT tournament. >> >>So it is good that i play real tournaments, and yes it doesn't matter whether >>world champs plays in USA or in Europe or in Asia or in middle east. In >>principle i will come and join. >> >>And no i would not have a problem with a world champs in UAE either nor USA. I >>would welcome it. I wonder though whether it political would be correct to >>organize something in USA nowadays. >> >>People like you should stop having a big mouth about ICGA organizers. >> >>It is true they ask money to organize an event and it is true that i am not a >>big fan of the amount of money they need to organize an event. >> >>However US organisations in the past needed a 10 fold budget to organize events >>there, so just do the math... >> >>In fact you can play a lot of FIDE rated events here with entry fees ranging >>from 40 euro to 125 euro. That's 9+ rounds or so. >> >>In USA a default participation in a tournament is like 250 dollars a person. >> >>Incredible prices. >> >>And you wonder why there is no computerchess tournaments organized in USA? >> >>That's because your big pal Hyatt tells at radio interviews that nothing ever >>will be able to equal deep blue. So no company of course is interested in USA to >>invest in computer chess world champs nowadays. > >Hyatt never said that nothing ever will be able to equal deep blue. >When do you plan to stop posting lies about him. > >Uri Never. It is all he actually knows how to do... Just like I supposedly said that my generalized speedup approximation formula works for _any_ number of processors when I have _always_ limited that formula to hardware I have actually run on... Just like I supposedly wrote a JICCA paper about the Crafty parallel search. I plan to do so, but it hasn't been written or published yet. Yet he claimed it had, and then accused me of denying something I had written. :) We should have a CCC poll question "Does _anybody_ believe that Vincent is a credible person regarding claims he makes here?" I suspect it would get 1-2-3 "yes" votes and that would be all... For obvious reasons...
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.