Author: Peter Berger
Date: 04:15:46 02/08/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 06, 2006 at 21:02:56, Roger Brown wrote: > At one point being a non-techie I was >>>actually wondering if just maybe.... >>> >> >>This is Roger Brown posting? The guy who used to speak for us poor users at >>times ? You have become a chessprogrammer yourself now and chose to join the >>darkside? ;) > > > > >Hello Peter, > >I wish I was a chessprogrammer! > >However I see what damage a missing punctuation sign can do. Let us look at >that sentence again. > >As posted, it suggests that I used to be a non-techie but now I am not. > >That would be a gross misrepresentation of the facts. > >:-)) > >Rewritten, I should have said: > >At one point, being a non-techie, I was .... > >Those commas make it clear that I was, still am and forever will be firmly on >the side of the non techie users (of which you are not one so do not even try to >sneak in!) > >:-)) > > >I still do my work for the users but I am talking directly to the authors of the >good stuff (yay, Winboard forever!!) instead of posting. > >The general computerchess mood is a lot less friendly these days so I avoid it >like the plague. > >:-( > > >Always good to read a Peter Berger post. Seems a rarity these days >unforunately. > > Glad to see you are still with us and keep the spirit ;) . I am not that involved with computerchess anymore, so I have little to post right now. What you perceive as less friendly might just be a general trend in testing and posting though. ( Of course there is also the issue that the spirit of the WinBoard forum has been more or less destroyed since it moved to its new place, but that's another and less interesting topic). The general level of professionalism in user testing has improved a lot in recent years , thanks to guys like the CEGT or Utzinger etc. . Jouni Uski put it nicely a few days ago - what's the point of doing any tests yourself, if an established rating gets published by CEGT two days later anyway? I guess at least for the programmers of the top amateur engines that's a great development, though it also meant that interest in middle class or lower-level engines deteriorated. But it's nearly always only about numbers now ( slight exception are the very obvious endgame flaws in Rybka that raised some interest recently). Someone does an interesting match and posts his impressions? Rest assured he will get the usual "not enough games" terror answers or tedious musings about statistical errors, and he won't bother to try again. And while I respect the rating list guys a lot for their efforts and endurance, to me it's hard to think of anything more boring than collecting the results of engine tests, done in a most scientific way, yawn. It has certainly become more difficult to comment on the chess part, simply as the engines continued to improve to a level that is hard to critizise or comment on for ordinary earthlings, but as no one even tries ( a few exceptions confirm the general rule ;) ), there is little input that would consist of more than numbers . Inspiring observations on positions and engines like Sune Larsson's have become very rare IMHO. And few people will just post something they really enjoyed doing with their chessprograms - what's left just all sounds like hard work. You remember Jorge Pichard? Not scientific at all, but some of his posts were quite inspiring for users and gave interesting ideas. I can't possibly comment on the programmers' discussions content-wise, but it seems they have become less frequent too. Just some random observations at lunch break, nothing serious ;) Peter
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.