Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Conspiracy -- conshmiracy

Author: Dann Corbit

Date: 11:51:12 01/19/00

Go up one level in this thread


On January 19, 2000 at 09:55:31, blass uri wrote:
[snip]
>I do not believe in the conspiracy theory but  it is clearly possible that a
>team of deeper blue and 2600 or even 2400 player is better than deeper blue.

In fact I already said that (for 2600 -- I starkly disagree about 2400).  From
my previous message:

"I will admit that having a super-GM in cahoots with Deep Blue *would* make a
stronger pair -- if you had a few months to form a workable system and a few
hundred games.  But the risk is so enormous that only a great fool would believe
an image conscious company like IBM would try a foolhardy thing like that."

However:

* I believe that only a super-GM would help against Kasparov.  Will you trust
the judgement of an IM or even a low-level GM to over-rule the machine and how
will you know when to pick which suggestion?

* I believe that it is far too dangerous to assume that a super-GM is going to
keep his/her mouth shut forever about it.  There is simply no way that IBM would
ever take a risk like that.

* I believe that suggesting that IBM cheated is a slam on the whole IBM team and
completely classless and spineless.

* I believe that repeating the claim without substantiation is a libelous,
classless, base act.  I think it is disgusting, repulsive, apalling.

I find it very surprising that some regulars in this forum will give credence to
such utter stupidity.  (I'm not talking about you -- you obviously did not try
to support that position).

[snip]



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.