Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 10:03:19 11/02/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 02, 1999 at 00:08:13, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>On November 01, 1999 at 22:25:45, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On November 01, 1999 at 19:49:30, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On November 01, 1999 at 18:20:21, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>
>>>>On November 01, 1999 at 16:10:04, James B. Shearer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What advantage? We will give both programs multiprocessors. If other
>>>>>programs are too backward to use the extra processors that's not Hyatt's fault.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>That's interesting. So you consider most of the top programs to be backward?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Christophe
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Must the world revolve around hyperbole?
>>>
>>>He didn't say commercial engines are backward. He said "if they are too
>>>backward to use the extra processors..."
>>>
>>>There's a world of difference.
>>>
>>>You said "In a few years all commercial engines will be using a parallel
>>>search..." in another post. I wonder if they will develop their own, or if
>>>they will read the 20 years of parallel search research that has been done,
>>>and then use that?
>>>
>>>hmmm...
>>
>>I don't know. Personally I would prefer to have the time to think about the
>>problem by myself right from the start. I have always done this in the past,
>>because I did not have access to documentation about computer chess, and I have
>>found this to be powerful.
>>
>>Not because I am bright (I don't think I am, I'm just determined). But when you
>>think hard enough on a problem and find your own way, you can understand much
>>better what has been published and take the most out of it.
>>
>
>And isn't it nice that some of us have left such things for others to study?
>
>and you slowly begin to see what I have been talking about...
>
>As I said, it isn't necessary to reveal current secrets. But wouldn't it
>be nice to know how genius 2's search worked for certain? How Dave did his
>kingside attack stuff in older wchess versions? Or does all that get lost
>when someone 'burns out'???
It would be better to have the details, but still, knowing that these things are
possible gives the interested one some good lines of research to follow. That's
information of a kind, and it's not that bad.
I think it's not difficult to have a significant number of commercial
programmers give away their secrets: just find an university that is willing to
pay them a decent salary and some bonus for publishing new stuffs and having
good results in tournaments.
I would be delighted to have this job myself. I'm not in love with secrecy, but
just with competition, and at the same time I have to make myself a living.
I really like to exchange ideas with Ed, this is the basic need of any human.
The situation of commercial (or amateur) programmers is kind of strange:
normally, people around us (in our family, our friends) understand nothing to
what we are doing. We feel ALONE all the time. When we meet people that could
fully understand our work, too bad we cannot talk with them!!!
Yes it's frustrating. I admire all the top programmers, and that includes some
amateurs, but I cannot share with them on the thing I like the most!
On the other hand, as I said before, I have already put myself in danger by
working too much on my program without making money from it.
I cannot decently continue in this way without having a good reason. I want to
pay my rent with the 17+ years I have spent on Chess Tiger. Is it that bad?
Bob, if your university is willing to take me, let's work together.
Christophe
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.