Author: Lanny DiBartolomeo
Date: 17:34:25 10/13/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 13, 1999 at 01:59:23, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On October 12, 1999 at 19:25:51, blass uri wrote: > >>On October 12, 1999 at 03:09:40, Bruce Moreland wrote: >> >>>On October 12, 1999 at 01:55:22, Micheal Cummings wrote: >>> >>>>They have nothing to gain or lose now anyway. DB had not been around for quite a >>>>long time, programs have advanced as too technology. I would be interested in >>>>seeing Shredder and your program ferret play DB using WCCC99 hardware. >>> >>>They totally have stuff to lose. People still remember that match. If you were >>>to pick some random person off the street, there is a good chance that they will >>>"know" that A) DB is the best chess entity on the planet, B)IBM built the thing. >> >>I do not think they have much to lose if they play with DB JR that is not Deeper >>blue(if DB JR is really better than the commercial programs) because of the >>following reasons: >> >>1)If they lose one game they always can say that it is only DB JR and not Deep >>blue. >> >>2)It is not clear to the public if DB JR(not deeper blue) is really better than >>the commercial programs so if they can prove a clear superiority(winning only >>16:4 in a match of 20 games) people will be more impressed by their results. >> >>Uri > > >Your view of the world is _much_ too small. The people that care whether DB Jr >can beat a commercial program can be counted on the fingers and toes of a few >dozen people. The number of people that know that DB beat Kasparov, something >no other computer has _ever_ done, would require maybe 100,000,000 people, using >fingers and toes to count them all. > I thought they were making a chess card with chips like DB jr? If they are wouldnt we be the ones purchasing this product? If so I would like to see it crush the other programs. So it seems like they would want to prove to future buyers its playing strength. Disreguard if i'm talking apples/Oranges here :)) and have my chips confused. >_those_ are the people IBM is interested in, as _those_ are the people that will >buy their hardware. They don't care squat about the few of us chess types that >are interested in this. We won't buy enough of their equipment to pay for one >newspaper ad. DB produced tens of millions of dollars of free advertisement. > >That didn't go lost on the bookkeepers... They aren't about to jeopardize that >kind of publicity now. Prior to beating Kasparov there was a lot of pressure to >keep DT/DB visible, as IBM even sponsored the last two ACM events. But now they >have the reputation and the only possible way to go is down, in public opinion.
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.