Author: Mike Byrne
Date: 16:01:58 04/24/05
Go up one level in this thread
On April 24, 2005 at 18:37:51, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On April 24, 2005 at 18:13:16, Mike Byrne wrote: > >>Sam Sloan has been proven to make fact out of fiction. Perhaps his notorious >>example is hwen he broadcasted over the internet the death of Peter Leko. If >>you want to go bed at night that whatever Sam Sloan writes should be presumed as >>100% fact -- God Bless You. > > >Mike, you cannot expect that non-professional writers on the internet have the >same cautiousness than maybe news agencies like Reuters or AP. At least it >wasn't meant to be a defamation against Leko. See, in Austria the famous pianist >Gulda came up with the message of his own death and then he went to give a >concert. This is NOT a point of any relevance. The same, if Kasparov makes some >naive steps in politics - then this has no great relevance either. But just to >give an example for a relevant story: the treatment of Kasparov during the event >in 1997 was wrong because it came from scientists during an experiment where >they wanted to find out how good their machine could play chess. That should be >tested against the best human player. As a matter of fact you can't find out it >if you inspire confusion and suspicions in your human opponent. That should be >self-evident. No matter how mad or impolite this player should behave himself. >The moment you don't try to change the situation you have no longer interest in >your experiment. > >As to Sam Sloan, I would add - as a European - that Sam is a good example for >American Free Speech, certainly NOT for the idea that he's always right in all >his positions. But don't we all miss certain truths at times? Why kicking the >guy who's not even present here in CCC? He's not a VIP. Sam is one of our kind. Sam has this uncanny knack for mixing fiction with fact and calling it fact. Needless to say , that presents him and everything he writes with huge credibility problem. In the US, it is sort like reading the National Inquirer, i.e., take it with grain of salt. In the corporate world, he is what we call a "loose cannon" and he would never survive in thah type of environment. Ulitmately, what he brings to the table is not a plus. not even a zero - he is negative because he spews forth so much disinformation, that anything good he brings gets way overshadowed. Just my opinion and I call it like I see it - others may feel free to disagree and I am sure some will. That is what makes the world great after all -- that is, we are all different and we may not always agree. Best, Michael
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.