Author: KarinsDad
Date: 21:15:02 03/26/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 26, 1999 at 20:25:47, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On March 26, 1999 at 16:35:04, KarinsDad wrote: > [snip] >> >>Bruce, >> >>What if (and this is just speculation) someone wrote a program where it was >>extremely difficult to tell if it was human or if it was a program? The program >>could be configured to play at 1600 or 2600 and it could do such an superb job >>that nobody could tell the difference. >> >>With the exception of your socializing comment (which might be handled by a >>knowledgeable operator and good analysis features of the program), such a >>program would not be contrained to the limitations that you effectively >>mentioned on today's current programs (which are very true today). It may not be >>commercially available, so you couldn't play it at home, it would have different >>attributes than current programs, and it's ability to adapt would be extremely >>human-like. >> >>Granted, today this is just speculation. But what if? >> >>Should such a program be segregated? Do people have a right to know that they >>are playing it? If so, why? Would there be any harm in people NOT knowing >>exactly who their opponent was in such a case (like they do not know based on >>the handles today)? >> >>BTW, from a pragmatic point of view, I agree with all of the points that you >>made. I'm trying to explore a little the realm of "what if". >> >>KarinsDad :) > >Here's a more important issue: When I play on ICC, the _only_ thing I get from >winning/losing/drawing is a rating adjustment. And we _all_ use those to try to >figure out who can play chess how well. > >Now what would you do if you play an 1800 player that uses a computer every now >and then? You get killed with your rating (I am talking about _me_ as a human >player here, not as a computer program). > >That is a real problem.. someone that says "so what if it is only once every 10 >games..." How often do you find an 1800 player that plays like a 2600 player >every 10th game? > >Not a reasonable thing... Robert, Well, I do not support this type of behavior. My questions were more theoretical since we do not have programs that play "nearly identical" to humans. But staying on your topic for a moment, I personally am a very inconsistent player (it probably has something to do with lack of concentration). So, my range of play is about 1300-2000, depending on the day, phase of the moon, number of Snickers bars in my pocket, etc. The same thing that you specified for a person that uses a computer every tenth game could apply to me as well (although maybe not to that extreme and most of my games tend to be in the 1700 range). So the question comes down to: would you find it unfair to play against a player like myself who's rating is currently about 400 points lower than his best (non-maintainable) playing ability? Is the problem in the diversity of playing ability or in the knowledge that such a player is not playing all of the games himself? The rating adjustments would be similar. And the next obvious question is: What are the chances that I would be considered a potential cheater on the chess servers due to my inconsistency? Something to think about. Oh, and my earlier post was not concerned with a program that would change it's capabilities on a server between one game and the next, it was more a question of a program that you could set to one rating and it would effectively play very human like chess at that rating, whatever that setting was. KarinsDad :)
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.