Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 22:21:08 01/13/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 14, 2006 at 01:09:25, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >On January 14, 2006 at 00:51:30, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On January 14, 2006 at 00:13:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>One note... >>> >>>If you look around, 90% of the people that stop participating in actual computer >>>chess discussions are those that chose to go "commercial". Or those that chose >>>to do something after lurking here for quite a while, then go off and become >>>ultra-secretive. The other 10% either would like to go commercial, but don't, >>>or they just "burn out." Burn-out is fairly common. I can only think of one >>>person that is still active that was around when I started competing in CC >>>events. Me. Why I didn't "burn out" I have no idea. And I haven't done so to >>>date either... >>> >>>The ones of us still releasing source code, or even if we are not, we still >>>choose to "hold nothing back" _still_ continue to discuss computer chess ideas. >>>I've been quieter than usual, because I have been busier than usual here at UAB, >>>and also because of the major changes being made in Crafty to get ready for the >>>next WCCC. But eventually, everything I have been doing will become public, and >>>that will continue so long as I am able to continue doing this stuff, hopefully >>>for many years yet to go... >>> >>>Remember that it is just as reasonable to _start_ a thread on some CC topic as >>>it is to wait for others to start it, and then jump in. In the past few years, >>>many have chosen to "go commercial" and that ends their participation in >>>technical discussions. >>> >>>That is sad, but it happens. Fortunately there are still a few around that will >>>continue to discuss things, and continue to push themselves (and the silent >>>lurkers) forward year by year. One simply has to decide whether to be an active >>>participant or just a lurker... >> >>Sometimes, they also get rejuvenated. I think Bruce Moreland may be picking up >>interest again. >> >>When Ed Schroder retired from computer chess, he gave detailed instructions on >>how to write a good program on his web site. He was often helpful with advice >>even when he was programming. >> >>I think in Christophe Theron's case, he discovered a beautiful woman and found >>out that they can be a lot more fun than even chess (drat!) >> >>I also think that the academic endeavor is the best approach in the long haul. >> >>I think that going professional would probably also take all or most of the fun >>out of chess programming. > >I don't put myself at any of their levels, but I did go away for a year, >and, with Don Beal's, Brian Richardson's, and Dan Homan's help, modify my >program so that it learns piece values from entirely randomized play starting >with all pieces equal to a pawn and no other evaluation knowledge besides >material. I am currently working on modifying it to do the same for non-material >pieces and encountering surprising resistance in the code. > >Brian convinced me to come back here and take a look at the goings-on and I am >it is all about Rybka and Fruit - two remarkable programs. I bought Rybka and >I downloaded Fruit. I've played one game against Rybka and briefly looked >at Fruit code enough that I know I still don't want to review another >programmer's code (in any application area) for any reason. > >I miss some of the longer discussions on computer chess programming but sobeit. > >Threads on the subject seem to die faster now here, but perhaps that's just a >misperception. I've been here a long time. It goes in waves. A lot of the programmers split time at the Winboard forum now, and I think that takes up a lot of their energy.
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.