Author: Thomas Mayer
Date: 12:43:39 05/17/05
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Pablo, >Thomas Mayer and Dr Robert Hyatt. nice to be named in one row with one of my own heros... :) Hopefully Bob is not upset about that... > With all respect for you, and chess community I would like to hear some > opinions about each question: Don't take everything too serious what I answer, but I will try to do my best. > A- Are the Sport News Journalist writing the truth about the real power Man > and Machine? Yes and no. You know, they can only report about what they see. And what DO they see ? Well, Kasparov (in bad shape, but that does not count) lost against Deep Blue, Kasparov could only draw Fritz in Bahrein, also only a draw against Junior and Kramnik only draw against Fritz. Bareev had a draw against Hiarcs. Not so known is that some years ago Huebner got some easy draws against Fritz. They are definitely not aware that some lower rated player can achieve similar results against engine - so how could they report about that ? > B- Is the truth relative? In this sense, have been Journalist writing just > about conventional fighting in conventional algorithms and in this sense > writing the truth? They wrote about what they have seen. Period. > C- Have been playing the Top Humans Opponents in matches against engines > really with a strong level? I think so, when we forget about Deep Blue Kasparov, the other above mentioned games seemed to me really okay. > D- Are the Computers as strong as experts are saying to the World across the > News? Not in all positions. If you find a way that they stumble into strange positions and lines, they behave sometimes like complete fools. Every Engine has this problems. > E- Have been at lest one real match Man Vs Machine that could indicate to us > (human beings) what is the real position in the battle man Vs machine? That's a matter of taste. My opinion is since long that computer can achieve results of a GM, but with a different style of play. Compared to the GM they know nothing about chess strategy and plans, but they are tactically soooo strong nowadays. > F- Does really to exist the antichess like one anti-traditional value and > chess parameter into engine motors and human brain? I don't really know what you mean with that -> but when you think here about your backdoor idea: well, yes I believe that there is still a way to beat every engine. And there is the possibility to close many of the backdoors when they are discovered. > G- Is it possible to play anti algorithm against human brain? Well, a starting point is for sure Quarks Anti-Human routine. The Anti-GM of Rebel or some human settings for Crafty are also ways to play better against humans. > H- Is it possible to play chess for the opposite way? ? > H- Why an amateur is capable to do that Top GM is not doing? Well, maybe the Top GM simply do not like to do it. > I- Is it possible to build an engine with anti engine parameters? I think yes. > J- where could be coming the engine build to play anti-engine games? ? You know that I want to try it somewhere in the future, likely this year. > K- Will be real important for future human chess players to have a tittle? Yes > L- Is going to exist a new official elo into Fide for human beings specialist > playing engines? No > Ll.- Will be possible to write a perfect "an anti-antichess opening book". No. Chess is too complex to close every hole just with a book > 12- When could human beings to see a long match and battle of at lest 20 long > time control (games 2 for week) against a chess human genius as GM Anan? I think it will not happen in the near future. Who would pay for that ? > 13- Is it dirty to have the human being the engine he-her is going to > challenger before to start the match, or dirty to chance the parameters > engines when the the match have started? Well, complicate thing. In my opinion both sides should be allowed to improve. Important is, that the human side can also prepare itself. So it needs games from the opponent even if that is not the final version he will play against. > 14- Was the GM Kasparov versus Deep Blue a dirty challenger? I don't know. For Kasparov the problem was, that he had not much material about Deep Blue. > 15- Must human beings to prepare for a real combat in future against engines? No > 16- Are going to want takes control of the Earth the engines? science fiction... :) > 17- Was terminator movie a fiction? sure ! :) > 18- Could an engine to love and to feel hate? Not really... > 19- Could engines to have a flexible intelligence? possibly... but you must define what you really mean here... it will not be as flexibel as humans are, I think Greets, Thomas
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.