Author: Vasik Rajlich
Date: 03:44:20 07/14/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 13, 2004 at 19:06:46, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >On July 13, 2004 at 19:01:14, Fernando Villegas wrote: > >>Well, then you should have used the parallel thing OR, > >By saying "you should have used the parallel thing" you assume that I actually >had a "parallel thing" and "chose" not to use it. Where did that assumption come >from? If I were given a quad Opteron I would have gladly used it. > > > >> as now happens, you will >>feel almost cheated and in any case unhappy. You was not given a donkey, you >>chose it because -according to your own words- riding the steed "is not fun". >>Omid, you just went wrong on that, assume it. >>Fernando There is no perfect solution, and an open-hardware event does have its advantages, but I agree with Omid. It's an organizational drain on the participants to have to find & use the best hardware. Since we all like analogies, here's another one: using steroids in sports. You could allow it, and allow all competitors to juice themselves up as they see fit. The spectators would surely love the performance, and it would be "fair" - everybody could juice up as they saw fit. Those who stay clean, pay the performance price which they choose. The drawback is that it becomes a huge burden for everybody. The athletes would have to juice up just to be competitive. This is the role that big hardware plays now in the WCCC. Vas
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.