Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: DB will never play with REBEL, and confidentiality.

Author: Don Prohaska

Date: 08:51:35 10/13/99

Go up one level in this thread


I don't know whether this has been discussed before, but if you send a
communication to someone who writes for publications, such as a reporter, can
you expect that communication to be kept confidential? Unless both of you agree
that it is off the record. I think some time back this argument was made in
another situation in terms of who was a journalist.




On October 13, 1999 at 02:55:14, Ed Schröder wrote:

>>Posted by Amir Ban on October 12, 1999 at 18:51:25:
>
>>>Rebel Company about the accusations:
>>>
>>>
>>>We were not aware of any restriction that playing against Deep Blue Junior
>>>was forbidden. Deep Blue Junior was there and we took the opportunity to find out
>>>more about this program. The result was posted as NEWS no more no less and we
>>>don't have (nor had) any intention to include Rebel's victory over Deep Blue
>>>Junior in our advertisements.
>>>
>>>
>>>We can't confirm the "one second" time control of Deep Blue Junior. Deep Blue
>>>Junior indeed played on a "one second" time control using its default time
>>>control but raising the time control caused Deep Blue Junior to think a lot
>>>longer (up to 10-15 seconds).
>>>
>>
>>This point is important, and I didn't see it discussed. If so, Hsu is
>>misinformed about what features were made available to users of DBjr, and
>>Rebel played a version that was much stronger than he thought. I don't remember if
>>they played equal time controls, but if they did, it may well be that the
>>contest was fair or close to fair (we need to assume that the DBjr server was
>>not overloaded, which to me seems likely, because it was hardly used
>>intensively at the stations I saw in Paderborn).
>
>DB-JR played on 5/all Rebel on 10/all. In the end both programs used the same
>amount of time for the games. I clearly remember a situation that DB-JR went
>into panic-time and used at least 30 seconds for its move. The DB-JR time
>control behavior was as normal as you can expect from a computer chess program
>playing a 5/all blitz game.
>
>>I wouldn't consider Rebel beating DBjr a surprise. Even assuming full-DB to be
>>the equal of Kasparov (doubtful), DBjr should be much weaker, and not more
>>than Rebel. Besides, isn't Rebel's record against rated players better than
>>DBjr's ?
>>I don't know the statistics, but I got the impression that DBjr's record is
>>not too good.
>>
>>I think it's pretty low to say or imply that Ed played DBjr for cheap
>>publicity. Obviously he did that out of curiosity.
>
>Right, I would have posted too if the result had been opposite. Next, it is no
>shame to lose from a 20,000,000 NPS machine. The screen + documentation
>clearly gave that impression.
>
>>It would make better business  sense to
>>concentrate on the WCCC rather than play improvised games in the hall, but
>>people who are curious do what is intersting, not important. It's clear
>>from Hsu & Campbell's letter and the clarification from Friedel that they are not
>>curious in the least, and that they don't give a damn about their peers respect.
>>That's a good enough reason not to respect them, and I don't.
>>
>>Amir
>
>According to Bob (I just wrote email to him about this) the Hsu/Campbell
>statement was done in private email and most probably was not meant for
>publication.
>
>Now think of this... in email we feel protected because of the private status.
>In email we often say things (or make jokes) to our friends we wouldn't dare
>to say in public. In email we act differently than in public. I think that's
>perfectly normal.
>
>Meaning to say that Hsu & Campbell most likely would have reacted in
>a different way if they would have known their email was meant for
>publication. When I read the Hsu/Campbell statement for the first time
>I immediately tasted that sayings like:
> 
>  "Either ICCA has violated our conditions of usage, or Ed Schröder
>   has misused this opportunity at will, to make false advertisement for
>   his program".
>
>are not common (normal) as being a proper way to react in public.
>
>Ed



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.