Author: stuart taylor
Date: 02:43:44 05/23/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 22, 2005 at 22:54:59, chandler yergin wrote: >On May 22, 2005 at 21:06:52, stuart taylor wrote: > >>On May 22, 2005 at 20:49:26, chandler yergin wrote: >> >>>On May 22, 2005 at 20:39:32, stuart taylor wrote: >>> >>>> If the qualities of Shredder 7.04 can be added to the qualities of Shredder 9, >>>>without taking down from either, then that program would be so far above, that >>>>I'd expect it would be a lasting legend. >>> >>> >>>A Computer is dumb! >>> >>>Main Entry: [1]dumb >>>Pronunciation: 'd&m >>>Function: adjective >>>Etymology: Middle English, from Old English; akin to Old High German tumb mute >>>Date: before 12th century >>>1 : lacking the power of speech <deaf and dumb from birth> <dumb animals> >>>2 : temporarily unable to speak (as from shock or astonishment) <struck dumb >>>with fear> >>>3 : not expressed in uttered words <dumb grief> >>>4 : SILENT; also : TACITURN >>>5 : lacking some usual attribute or accompaniment; especially : having no means >>>of self-propulsion <dumb barge> >>>6 a : markedly lacking in intelligence : STUPID b : showing a lack of >>>intelligence c : having little or no meaning — sometimes used in the phrase dumb >>>luck >>>7 : not having the capability to process data <a dumb terminal>; compare >>>INTELLIGENT 3a >>>synonym see STUPID >>>- dumb·ly /'d&m-lE/ adverb >>>- dumb·ness noun >>>usage There is evidence that, when applied to persons who cannot speak, dumb has >>>come to be considered offensive. >>> >>>Pronunciation Key >>> >>>© 2001 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated >>>Merriam-Webster Privacy Policy >>> >>>That is what the IBM Scientits said about Deep Blue! >>>Dumber than the stupidest Human! >>> >>> No other program would ever be able to >>>>defeat it in a crushing way...ever! (with equal hardware and timings). >>>> >>>>Do Shredder realize this? >>> >>>A Program doesn't realize "anything"! >>> >> >>I mean, it's programmer(s). >>Is that all you were trying to say? >> >>The fact that a program is dumb, is what makes it the most interesting thing, to >>see it looking like a human, appreciated by those who understand the language of >>chess. >>S.Taylor >>> > >Nonsense! >It doesn't look like a human. It has NO Human characteristics. >Humans understand it for what it is; a "Tool" made by man for the >enjoyment of man. >Nothing more, nothing less. >I'm amazed and appalled that you would even try to raise it a level >beyond that! >Stop it! > No I'm NOT going to stop it, Chandler! Chess computing might be one of the greatest computing challenges there are, and it might even succeed in achieving human status. It might even dehumanize chess, which will make the computer look like a real human. In EVERY good way, over the board. But this is only for chess. For humans, chess is only a game! Otherwise, a computer is inanimate, which is below vegetable, which is below animal, which is below human. ButI'm happy to see that you think so highly of man! S.Taylor > >>>> >>>>If so, perhaps they managed to do this with the latest 64-bit upgrade? >>>> >>>>Then, it would be worth getting a 64-bit computer in honour of it. But that >>>>shouldn't mean that it should not be re-done even again, back to 32-bit, as an >>>>upgrade patch (perhaps something like 9.04). >>>> >>>>S.Taylor
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.