Author: Mike Hood
Date: 02:43:50 08/23/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 22, 2004 at 18:29:14, James T. Walker wrote: >On August 22, 2004 at 13:46:54, George Sobala wrote: > >>On August 22, 2004 at 13:01:16, James T. Walker wrote: >> >>>If it has no commercial value then what is it's purpose. Are they trying to >>>accomplish what Deep Blue already has done? >> >>And what was it that Deep Blue did exactly? It beat Kasparov in an emotionally >>charged match where he threw the last game, only to be immediately dismantled >>and it never played again. It certainly did not demonstrate true chess >>superiority over the World Champion > >Your assumption that "Kasparov threw the match" is silly. Unless of course you >have some proof. Yes it was dismantled after it accomplished what it was built >for. I wish it had not but since IBM paid for it they can do what they want >with it. If Kasparov did indeed throw the match (which I doubt), it was only because of a temper tantrum caused by the emotionally charged matches. And a win is a win, whatever the reason, so let's leave this point be. As for IBM dismantling the machine, everyone knows why they did this. Defeating the reigning world champion was a major PR victory, but IBM was afraid it was a fluke, so they wanted to quit while they were ahead. Kasparov might have won a return match. And Anand (in my opinion the world's best anti-computer player) might have squashed Deep Blue 4-0 a month later, which was too much of a risk. Who knows? Give Eduard Nemeth an Internet connection to Deep Blue and, after some experimenting, he might have chalked up a 24-0 victory.
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.