Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 13:01:43 02/02/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 02, 1999 at 15:42:02, blass uri wrote: >On February 02, 1999 at 14:58:44, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>They are not going to put Deep Blue back together. If they put it back >>together, using a faster computer, and they lose a match, maybe their computer >>sucks? > >I do not understand it. >Do they think that we are stupid?. >I do not think that I can learn about the ability of a computer by the result of >a chess match. >Genius3 on a pentium90 won kasparov 1.5:0.5 in active chess >Genius3 on faster pentium lost later to kasparov 1.5:0.5 in active chess > >Does someone thinks that it proves something about the hardware? >Does someone thinks that Pentium90 is better than the faster pentium because of >these results? They think we don't matter, which is of course obviously true. When you put out a press release like this you aren't trying to reach the people who have bought >= 10 chess programs and >= 10 dedicated chess playing machines. They are trying to reach the general public. They already did it with the match itself, and these press-releases are echos of that. >> And if they win, they won on a slower computer already, so who cares? > >I care because the win was not convincing >I am interested to see another match with better conditions for kasparov >(He should have 48 hours between games and they should play some games before >the match against other strong GM's) Nobody else cares. Pick someone at random off the street and ask them how many games that match was, or at what time control, and they wouldn't know how many games, and they wouldn't know what a time control is. >>They aren't in this for the science or the chess or the computer chess. No way. >> The team almost certainly is, but they aren't the ones calling the shots. >> >>The public thinks that chess has been conquered by these new powerful *IBM* >>computers. IBM would be stupid to do anything to undermine this opinion, and >>from a business point of view they are right to try to capitalize on it. > >I think that the public of intelligent no chess players is not impressed by >winning kasparov and the public of chess players can see that deeper blue is not >close to perfect. > >Do they want to impress only stupid people? > >Uri I don't think that the average person who is in the market for a supercomputer spends a lot of time playing chess. bruce
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.