Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 10:56:37 01/30/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 29, 2000 at 19:53:53, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>On January 28, 2000 at 17:32:22, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On January 28, 2000 at 11:25:41, Amir Ban wrote:
>>
>>>On January 28, 2000 at 08:11:13, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>
>>>>On January 28, 2000 at 06:09:13, Chris Carson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On January 28, 2000 at 03:22:28, Ed Schröder wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On January 27, 2000 at 22:17:53, Albert Silver wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On January 27, 2000 at 21:32:07, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On January 27, 2000 at 21:18:05, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>>>>>[snip]
>>>>>>>>{regarding DB support}:
>>>>>>>>>This is an unforgivable sin here or anywhere else. I think it quite funny
>>>>>>>>>that (a) folks wonder why Hsu doesn't post here; and then (b) attack anything
>>>>>>>>>they do as inferior.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I have said this before... They are far better than anybody (other than maybe
>>>>>>>>>myself and a couple of others) give them credit for. Just continue to watch
>>>>>>>>>the analysis of the DB logs. We suddenly discover that (a) they are searching
>>>>>>>>>a lot deeper than some kept thinking; (b) their branching factor is actually
>>>>>>>>>not much worse than the rest of us; (c) etc.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Best to wait and watch. Lots more will come out over time... But the
>>>>>>>>>naysayers will _never_ be silenced...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I find it very puzzling the huge amount of absolute hostility towards Deep Blue
>>>>>>>>[and HERE of all places]!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The last match was 1997. That's about 3 years ago, and we still talk about it
>>>>>>>>almost daily. Nothing comes even remotely close to being as interesting as the
>>>>>>>>Deep Blue match. Nothing has ever generated the publicity for computer chess
>>>>>>>>like the Deep Blue match.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>And yet people are clearly *angry* at the Deep Blue team. Is there some sort of
>>>>>>>>history that would explain it? I keep feeling that I have walked late into a
>>>>>>>>movie and everyone is panning the hero, who seems like such a nice guy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Most amazing of all are the sort of persons who are irate. Almost always
>>>>>>>>incredibly intelligent computer science types.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>*boggle*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It's human nature. Remember that the last DB news wasn't three years ago but 3
>>>>>>>weeks ago. Until this news, there had been at least two hopes, however remote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>- DB would somehow and somewhen be taken off the shelf and play another titanic
>>>>>>>match against Kasparov (or anyone)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>- DB would be made available to all as a PC card.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>DB was by far the strongest chess playing machine ever built. Nothing came
>>>>>>>remotely close (except for its own predecessors). And now we are told clearly
>>>>>>>that neither will ever happen and Hsu has gone off to greener pastures. Nothing
>>>>>>>wrong with this, EXCEPT that Hyatt has made it clear that it is his belief that
>>>>>>>NO ONE will reach that level for another decade because all of its secrets are
>>>>>>>locked away. Everyone, including the programmers, feels deeply cheated. NO DB
>>>>>>>and much worse: no way to build on DB so to get there you have to start from
>>>>>>>scratch. This is simply terrible. It wasn't destroyed, the designers didn't die,
>>>>>>>and the blueprints still exist; they are just locked away, and since Hsu has the
>>>>>>>key, he is the butt of the anger. So the reaction is understandable: rather than
>>>>>>>accept this, many would prefer to tear it down so the pain is lessened. If you
>>>>>>>can believe it will only take 5 years to get there, it seems less tragic. That's
>>>>>>>what I believe this is all about.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Maybe the fact that they don't play is part of the game?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Ed
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Ed, that is my frustration, although I understand why
>>>>>they limited play before the match, I am confused about not using
>>>>>DBjr after the match with the SSDF or Computer tournament. There
>>>>>is a financial conponent, as well as a reputation component. :)
>>>>>
>>>>>Best Regards,
>>>>>Chris Carson
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>There is also this pretty important person with the title "Vice president of
>>>>marketing." _HE_ makes all the decisions about P/R activities.
>>>
>>>It does indeed seems true that the way the Deep Blue project carried on was a
>>>result of narrow commercial reasons.
>>>
>>>This may be an explanation, but not a vindication. A pioneering project that was
>>>supposed to done in the name of science, and in a sense our entire 40-year old
>>>field of computer chess, was made hostage to the short-lived, almost trivial,
>>>interests of IBM Corporation. If we believe this to be true, then we should be
>>>VERY angry.
>>>
>>>Amir
>>
>>
>>I personally sensed a feeling of frustration in the DB guys when I talked with
>>them. Particularly in the last match, the _real_ DB team was pretty well put
>>in the background. The lawyers/marketing folks called the shots, made the
>>decisions, told Hsu/etc what to do, when to jump, how high to jump, etc.
>>Because it was a _BIG_ marketing deal to the folks at the top, and they wanted
>>to extract every bit they could from it.
>>
>>I can only imagine how frustrating that must have been. Since Hsu no longer
>>works at IBM, I can guess...
>
>Right we can't blame it on the programmers.
>I blame Kasparov incredible though. See how well he played and how well
>he kept positions a draw even with a pawn less in wijk aan zee 2000. Some
>games he CRUSHED the opponents pathetically from opening. Home prepared.
>
>With his openings preparing he wiped out the best of the world again
>previous week. All the pressure was on kasparov and he performed great again.
>Kasparov handles pressure great, always did that. See his most important
>matches against Karpov. Kasparov is born for pressure.
>
>Kasparov performs great in 2000.
>He played great before 97 too.
>
>Yet when playing the computer Kasparov plays a kind of : "i don't care chess,
>when it's too late i start playing some decent moves, still missing things".
>
>Like against deep blue he played without openingspreparement. Playing the
>caro-kann in game 6, though i can't remember he ever played that with black
>before.
>
>He doesn't fear the entire world top, but fears the openingspreparement
>of deep blue, done by a retired grandmaster, who kasparov sometimes
>at 20 boards at the same time beats in a simultaneous exhibition?
>
>Let's get real, the only one to blame is Kasparov, the
>behaviour of Hsu was logical, from IBM even more logical, but Kasparov
>didn't behave normal. It's hard to express in words that don't get
>censored directly here... ...if kasparov just had drawn that 6th game,
>or won that 6th game, then the whole deep blue affair would be completely
>different. We would hear about the new micron technology that the new
>chips were gonna use. We would hear about how many nodes a second the
>new cpus would gonna get (as in 1997 the only important thing was nodes a
>second for IBM, and Hsu sure did a great job in that respect). We would
>not have heart about deep blue anyway. No one would make it worth mentioning.
>People forget scores. People only remember who has won.
>
>Kasparov sucked in the only thing he is good at... ...winning chessgames.
>
>Vincent
I can think about this from another angle.
Actually, Kasparov has completely KILLED Deep Blue by losing only a 6 games
match.
If Kasparov had won, Deep Blue would still be alive, the team still working to
improve it.
Kasparov KILLED the thing, definitely.
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.