Author: Henrik Dinesen
Date: 00:51:28 07/11/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 10, 2005 at 15:02:44, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: >On July 10, 2005 at 14:23:58, Fernando Villegas wrote: > >>So you say both are search-oriented because Fruit is so and then, if matching >>Sh, then the last must be so, also, only way to match it? >>Perhaps. But also... >>Perhaps It could be that very good search still is better that knowledge >>Perhaps it could be we still lack enough games to see. >> >>My guess is that each new generation of programs can see further and be better >>because they "stand on the shoulders giants". >>New programmer counts with an already developped cluster of heuristic to begin >>with AND with the freshness and enthusiasm of the beginning. His new ideas can >>be seasoned with the efficient old ones. >>In the meantime, old programmers tend to exhaust his stock of ideas and even his >>will to carry on. >>We have sseen both things many times alreadyu. >>My best to you and Alex...And wife >>Fernando > >Thanks Fernando, > >yes, it's always the guys who were here before us that we should thank for our >"new" ideas and we build on them. > >As for search, in a sense you are quite right: I too believe that very deep >search simulates knowledge. Like when an intelligent human overcomes a mind-orientated task better than a well-educated human (expert) in his/her own field? When intelligence in it's hole concept moves towards an greater understanding, instead of just "simple" knowledge? I see it as a logic comparison, despite all obvious differences. Regards Henrik
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.