Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 15:16:57 04/27/05
Go up one level in this thread
On April 27, 2005 at 17:48:53, Matthew Hull wrote: >On April 27, 2005 at 17:05:21, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On April 26, 2005 at 15:59:11, Steven Edwards wrote: >> >>>I'm sure that issue was covered in the match contract. In computer chess events >>>for nearly three decades prior to the event, adjustments made between games were >>>permitted. >> >>And this is the cancer that destroys honest computer vs human chess. >> >> >>>Kasparov knew what he was doing, particularly in the second match >>>after his experience with the first. >> >>Interesting to write what Kasparov knew. We should better deal with what the >>computerchess people knew. Apparently they didn't really know what they are >>doing. And that for decades already. Ok, humans never really cared that much >>because the overall chess emulation wasn't strong enough to be considered for >>serious. But if compuerchess is propagating the superiority over human chess >>things should be clarified a bit... >> >> >> >> >>> >>>Kasparov is being a sore loser and is unhappy because he didn't get a third >>>match and the money that would have come with it. He's appears to be trying to >>>help draw attention to himself for his political asperations that have nothing >>>to do with chess, and he's making Valdimir Putin look good by comparison. >> >> >>For sure Kasparov isn't a sore loser when it was Hsu&IBM who deconstructed the >>machine so that no further tests could be made. Scientifically this is a crime >>(that is what Kasparov is saying in the quoted interview). Whith whom Kasparov >>should have made a third match? With people who betray their own science? > > >Unfair. It was not Hsu decision to "deconstruct" the machine. But you blame >him anyway. Why do you do this? It is completely unfair. > >You use this to claim Hsu cheated science. But your claim is bogus because Hsu >had NO CONTROL over that. You make me laugh and shed tears. A scientist who has no control over his science is no scientist! A scientist who sold his moral to economy has lost his status of scientist. This is so trivial and sad to know that this could happen in our field of computerchess. > >Give it up, Rolf. You can't fool anybody with such poor logic built upon false >premises. > > > > >>That >>Kasparov is not a politician, this is a different question. I would agree! He's >>not.
This page took 0.01 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.