Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 04:33:10 01/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 11, 2000 at 07:17:15, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 11, 2000 at 05:11:51, Amir Ban wrote: > >>On January 10, 2000 at 21:30:52, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >> >>>Here we disagree: >>> >>>(1) I believe DB is Hsu and others, not IBM - exactly as Junior is Amir Ban, not >>>Chessbase. >> >>It's not a question of what you believe in. Hsu may have been Deep Thought, but >>he certainly wan't Deep Blue. Deep Blue is the multi-million dollar project. >>Deep Blue is the PR machine. Deep Blue is the three grandmasters we got after >>those students showed they can deliver speed but not results. Deep Blue is a >>trademark of IBM. Deep Blue is C.J.Tan. Deep Blue is one of IBM's 700 lawyers I >>got bumped to when I tried talking to them about using the name DB Junior. Deep >>Blue is Garry Kasaprov. >> > > >That makes no sense. Hsu designed the hardware. And wrote most of the >software. Without him, DB is "dead". As someone else said, it is equivalent >to saying that Ed is not Rebel, or you are not Junior, or I am not Crafty. UAB >pays my salary. They provide the machine I use. They encourage me to do >various things. They aren't "Crafty" however. To you, to me, to people in computer chess, DB is Hsu and his team. To the rest of mankind, which is the immense majority, DB is IBM. Probably they never heard of Hsu. It was IBM and not Hsu who saw their shares sky rocketing after the DB-Kasparov match. Another example, we know that Chessmaster is Johan de Koenig, but the buyers of Chessmaster have no idea of who is this guy. With this I mean that it is not the same for the public and therefore for Kasparov to play a machine built by Hsu than playing IBM in the rematch. Once IBM stepped out, it is an entirely different ball game. In fact, it wouldn't be seen as rematch at all. Now, why would Kasparov play a XXX computer program in an official match? Enrique >>Deep Blue is not Hsu, and the fact that he couldn't even get to first base alone >>is proof enough. > >That is a leap I don't follow. This would cost real money. Without something >in return (IE why does a company pay millions of bucks for a superbowl >commercial? Because they believe they will make more than they spend, due to >increased sales. A new DB/PC machine would have to offer the same return for >someone to build it. And then Kasparov didn't help with his nonsensical claims >after the last match... as a company supporting a new DB development would >probably want _positive_ P/R, and not that kind of nonsense. > > > > >> >> >>>(2) After second match Kasparov said that new match must have nothing in common >>>with IBM. Money must come not from IBM, organizers must be not from IBM, etc. >>> >> >>He was talking about the organization of the match and its sponsoring. Hsu was >>still looking for initial project funding. >> >>Amir >> > > >It was obvious he wanted nothing more to do with IBM however. Does it _really_ >matter whether he plays Deep Blue built by IBM, or Deep Hsu built by Intel? >assuming the "Deep Hsu" is even stronger? > > > > >> >>>Eugene >>> >>>On January 10, 2000 at 16:58:05, Amir Ban wrote: >>> >>>>On January 10, 2000 at 12:31:05, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >>>> >>>>>Words "I will treat you exactly as any other challenger" means that he backed >>>>>off his own (Kasparov's) previous rematch challenge, made after 2nd DB match. >>>>>And that is exactly what Hsu is saying. Or my interpretation is wrong? >>>>> >>>>>Eugene >>>>> >>>> >>>>The challenge was made to IBM, and if I understand correctly, still stands. Hsu >>>>is not IBM, though he seems to be unaware of the difference between the Deep >>>>Blue project under IBM, and himself alone. Remember Kasparov said he regarded >>>>the approach as not serious. I understand why. Hsu is not the first tech person >>>>to confuse between his technical skills and the strength of his entire >>>>organization, but nobody knows better than Kasparov that Deep Blue is not Hsu. >>>>It's IBM. Hsu is valuable but replaceable. Hsu alone is nothing. If he didn't >>>>understand this before, I think he understands it now. >>>> >>>>In fact, if there's one person who's indispensable for Deep Blue, it's Kasaprov. >>>> >>>>Amir >>>> >>>> >>>>>On January 10, 2000 at 10:52:12, Amir Ban wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On January 09, 2000 at 22:21:25, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>You can read the letter at http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/feng.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Your comments? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Dave >>>>>> >>>>>>Shay and I called Kasparov and asked him about it, and here's what he has to say >>>>>>(not an exact quote): >>>>>> >>>>>>There was one short letter from Hsu, which was answered by an even shorter >>>>>>letter, and that was the entire discussion. >>>>>> >>>>>>He felt that the question/proposition was not serious from the business point of >>>>>>view. >>>>>> >>>>>>The answer Hsu got was: Kasparov will play ANY computer, under suitable terms, >>>>>>provided the computer is a known entity that has a record against other >>>>>>opponents. He remembers that the conversation with Hsu ended after he received >>>>>>this answer. >>>>>> >>>>>>Kasparov told us that he reconfirms this commitment, and cited his agreement to >>>>>>play Deep Junior in the coming online tournament. Kasparov told us he will not >>>>>>agree to play against a mystery box as Deep Blue was before their match, and >>>>>>that the machine should have some public record before it plays him. >>>>>> >>>>>>Kasaprov also knew that Hsu has been talking to Microsoft about this. >>>>>> >>>>>>So far from Kasaprov. >>>>>> >>>>>>We tried to reach Owen Williams to clarify some more things, but couldn't reach >>>>>>him. There's some apparent contradiction in the number of messages passed and >>>>>>their content, which maybe Owen could clarify, but I don't think it's very >>>>>>important, because obviously both sides are telling the same story, but from >>>>>>their own point of view. >>>>>> >>>>>>Hsu bought permission from IBM to build his own version of Deep Blue. He needed >>>>>>to build a new chip, to develop new hardware and software, and get a new project >>>>>>going on. He needed funding for this project, and he could get it only if >>>>>>Kasparov gave prior commitment to play it. Kasparov, by his version, basically >>>>>>told him to come back when he has a working machine and a record to prove it. >>>>>>With this answer, Hsu could not make progress, and so folded his tent. >>>>>> >>>>>>I'm guessing that Hsu, a tech person, viewed the fact that he didn't have IBM >>>>>>with him, no funding, no project and no machine as temporary technicalities, and >>>>>>didn't see these as obstacles to planning a match. Kasparov probably saw it >>>>>>differently. >>>>>> >>>>>>IMO, if Kasparov indeed answered with "come back when you have a machine", >>>>>>that's a reasonable reply that does not break his former commitment. However Hsu >>>>>>didn't need Kasparov so much to play a match as he needed him to make the entire >>>>>>project possible. >>>>>> >>>>>>Amir
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.