Author: Pablo Ignacio Restrepo
Date: 13:36:09 05/17/05
Go up one level in this thread
Hello Thomas. Thank you very mutch for your answer and opinion. Now I known more about what I love: "Chess Computers." Best Regard, Pablo On May 17, 2005 at 15:43:39, Thomas Mayer wrote: >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.