Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Kasparov is not a computer chess expert

Author: Dann Corbit

Date: 16:47:52 05/06/99

Go up one level in this thread


On May 05, 1999 at 15:43:23, Prakash Das wrote:
[snip]
> No one is casting aspersions (yet) on the respectable Ken Thompson. It's
>disingenuos to suggest that.. He may have arbitrated but what he was arbitrating
>exactly? The whole operation was financed, staged and managed single-handedly by
>IBM only, one arbiter is not enough. When DB was restarted after a crash, I
>doubt an arbiter handled himself (or oversaw) the whole startup process.. most
>likely he entrusted it to the ibm people. It's very easy to do foul things, IBM
>had a big stake.
>
> Did IBM in fact do that? We don't know for sure. They should be publishing the
>entire history of the games (every iota). But they won't do that - it was an
>exhibition designed for IBM's benefit.
>
> Is Deep Blue a weak computer then? Of course not, with it's special purpose
>hardware, it's quite a challenging thing.
Here's an interesting thought:
After any of the crashes and restarts (how many were there?), did Deep Blue
suddenly make an astounding strategic move that puzzled Kasparov, or were those
moves only during normal move exchange sequences?

If the move suggested after a restart was pretty bland, then why should we
suspect anything at all?

I think the challenges to the integrity of IBM are badly misplaced.  The entire
Deep Blue experiment did more for chess and chess programming than anything
anyone else has done in recent history.  Look, we're still talking about it
today, and it was two years ago, so it must have been pretty interesting.

Anything they could possibly have gained by cheating would be outweighed a
billion times by the losses they would suffer if caught cheating.  IBM is
conservative.  There is no way I will ever believe they would do something like
that without real, concrete evidence.

I don't claim to be impartial.  I have genuine, deep-seated admiration for what
they did.  I also think GK was a spoil-sport afterwards.  So maybe I even have
an axe to grind.  But even with a slanted view, I really, honestly can't imagine
some big evil plot behind it all.  It's just too absurd.



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.