Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 18:19:21 01/12/05
Go up one level in this thread
On January 12, 2005 at 20:17:08, Uri Blass wrote: >On January 12, 2005 at 19:57:49, chandler yergin wrote: > >>On January 12, 2005 at 19:09:40, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On January 12, 2005 at 18:57:24, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>On January 12, 2005 at 18:46:12, chandler yergin wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 18:21:14, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 18:00:30, chandler yergin wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 17:43:45, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 17:26:40, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On January 12, 2005 at 13:31:16, chandler yergin wrote: >>>>>>>>>[snip] >>>>>>>>>>>This is why I keep pestering Skinner to let me download some of them :) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>And when the 7-man tables are finished? (2010 or so :)) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Not in your lifetime! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>All the essential files will be done before long. >>>>>>>>>KQQQQQk is not very interesing, for instance. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Computers will become >>>>>>>>>>>invincible in the ending, as they win all "simple" endings like KQPPKQP with >>>>>>>>>>>ease. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>anthony >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Not until you get the BUGS out of the Programs. >>>>>>>>>>Humans still Rule; NOT Silicon Chips! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Humans also have flaws in their analysis. Eventually, computers will win every >>>>>>>>>game, because humans advance slowly and compute power advances exponentially. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>It is simply inevitable >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>It is not so clear. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>If the game is complicated enough computers will eventually win every game but >>>>>>>>if the game is simple enough humans may play perfect at least in part of the >>>>>>>>games and get draws. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>It is not clear that chess is complicated enough so humans cannot avoid drawing >>>>>>>>against computers. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>YES! They can Draw! >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>A deterministic machine will be unable to win every game because human who want >>>>>>>>to draw it will need only to learn the moves of game of that machine against >>>>>>>>itself and use them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>What do you call a 'deterministic' machine? >>>>>> >>>>>>deterministic machine is machine that always play the same move from the same >>>>>>position. >>>>>> >>>>>>>Computers "Store & Retrieve Information. They have NO intelligence! >>>>>>>I'm glad you realize that! >>>>>> >>>>>>Computers need no intelligence to be not deterministic. >>>>>> >>>>>>Changing the weight of the evaluations by some small random number can cause >>>>>>them to choose different move. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Look at the EPD Test Positions.. How many Programs Fail to Solve them? >>>>>>>Hmmmm? >>>>>> >>>>>>Computers get bettter and better and I do not claim that it is impossible that >>>>>>in the future they will solve every chess problem. >>>>> >>>>>I DO! >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>probably you will not live to see it but it is possible that younger people than >>>>>>you may see it. >>>>> >>>>>Nonsense! >>>>>> >>>>>>>How many make D-U-M-B mistakes...? >>>>>>>Hmmmm? >>>>>>>Computers will NEVER Solve Chess! >>>>>>>Period! >>>>>> >>>>>>Not in the near future but I cannot be sure of never. >>>>> >>>>>I can! >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>I cannot be sure that it is impossible that humans will invent some algorithm to >>>>>>detect illogical moves and by pruning them will solve chess. >>>>> >>>>>You fail to grasp the Obvious! >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>It is also possible that if computers search deep enough they will practically >>>>>>solve chess and inspite of no proof that they solve chess nobody will be able to >>>>>>beat them even with take back. >>>>> >>>>>Nonsense! >>>>>Your enamoration for a man-made machine is tooo much! >>>>>I don't buy it! >>>>>There is not a Database large enough or a Program 'smart enough, or the time >>>>>long enough to 'solve' what is for all practical purposes 'infinite' >>>>>possibilities. Your Hard Drive can be spinning until the Universe is a Cold Dark >>>>>Place.. and NOT SOLVE CHESS! >>>>>Period! >>>>> >>>>>If you don't like to consider Cold.. then until "HELL FREEZES OVER" >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You spout Nonsense! >>>> >>>>SQRT(10^43) nodes is a lot less than infinite, and that is how many nodes are >>>>needed to solve chess. Or [more simply] to make the perfect move given any >>>>position. Chess will be solved in the lifetime of the readers of this forum. >>>>It is simply unquestionable to those with understanding of simple mathematics. >>> >>>I have no proof that sqrt(10^43) is enough. >>> >>>It may be enough but may be not enough and it is probably not enough with the >>>techniques that are used today. >>> >>>10^43 may be the number of possible positions in chess but it does not mean that >>>sqrt(10^43) is enough for the same reason that I do not know of a way to solve >>>KRB vs KR position with only sqrt(64^5) nodes inspite of the fact that there are >>>less than 64^5 KRB vs KR positions. >>> >>>64^5=2^30 >>>sqrt(64^5)=2^15 >>> >>>I know of no program that can solve KRB vs KR positions with no tablebases in >>>2^15 nodes even if solving only mean finding the right move. >>> >>>The question if chess will be solved in the next 50 years is an open question. >>>We also do not know what will be the speed of computers 50 years from today. >>> >>>Uri >> >>Today.. thay can't even solve a Mate in 35 that a young Lady saw... It is irrelevant, because they will play the same move sequence in a game. And each year they gain a ply or better. So any depth a human can compute will eventually be exceeded by a computer. The difference will be that the computer will make far less mistakes. >The question is also if she saw the mate or sayed for some positions that this >is a mate in less than 10 without calculating. > >Can you show us a tree of all the lines that lead to mate? > >>Or.. another position where she annouced Mate in 21... after searching BILLIONS >>of Positions. >>Chess Will NOT be solved by Computers. >>Programmers STFU! >>You are jusr embarrassing yourselves. >>!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > >I do not expect it to happen in the near future but it does not mean that it >will never happen. Jules Verne's writings looked pretty fanciful when he wrote them.
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.