Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 13:17:59 01/01/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 01, 2006 at 12:40:45, Zappa wrote: >On January 01, 2006 at 05:17:34, Otello Gnaramori wrote: > >>On December 31, 2005 at 16:28:52, Zappa wrote: >> >>>To paraphrase Stuart's post, "Rybka beats HIARCS because it is better". Looks >>>like you are one of those people that is impressed by long sentences, no matter >>>how inane the actual content . . . >>> >>>anthony >> >>Why inane ? Probably the Stuart's sentence was a bit ironic but it reflects >>quite good the actual situation... > >Ironic is not the word here. Please read his post again. There is simply >nothing there: no humor, no information, just a lot of commas. The fact that >you are unable to perceive this simply exposes your reading comprehension level. > >anthony It is very disappointing to read such a posting from a native English writer. And also because you are a promissing programmer like Vas. Stu wrote this: "Because it *is* effective. Because it uses techniques, methods, or whatever, that, heretofore, have not been used in such combination or as effectively, or which are altogether new inventions of IM designer." And you, the programmer of Zappa, you say that Stuart said nothing at all. This is nonsense because it's provenly wrong. Stu said 1) Vas did use something "new" in Rybka and/or 2) Vas created a new and more effective combination of either methods or techniques and 3) as a matter of fact Vas made all this work very effectively in Rybka. Point 2) is interesting IMO. But it is also clear that Stuart couldnt exactly say WHAT Vas had created new or more effectively. And this is the reason why you are unhappy with his posting. But you called something "nothing" which is a clever differentiation of the possible explanation for Rybka. Perhaps others can add infos for something really new in Rybka because it's already in the free version. Perhaps others can show why it must be a new creation. Scientifically Stuart wrote a better message as if he had written fantasies. Others are invited to add their opinions. Not a bad situation overall.
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.