Author: KarinsDad
Date: 21:41:17 02/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 12, 2000 at 21:44:03, stuart taylor wrote: [snip] > >I think chess is different. Chess is a human endeavor, not suited to machines. >I personally feel that if any machine can produce greater chess wisdom than >a human, then the human may justifiably feel challenged by it. >And that is what I'm waiting to see with baited breath-if it can happen. > In fact I don't think there is any other endeavor that human can meet >machine, moreso than chess! Checkers? Chinese Chess? Probably so to some people. Just depends on what your cup of tea is. > The world championship should be a human. But a human I think cannot have a >clean conscience if machine is doing better. What will happen in 50 years when no human on the planet can touch the best computers in chess? Do you think humans will have a clean conscience then? I would think that they will still be playing chess, but the rules will change a little: no adjournments, possibly extensions on the 50 move rule, no electronic devices within the hall, etc. But the bottom line is that they will still probably be playing chess, regardless of what the programs can do. I'm also saying that deep blue >has a long way to go to seriously challenge Kasparov on equal terms. > (But it is necesary that the human should not be claiming that he didn't have >enough time to think, as this is a different problem) > Stuart Taylor KarinsDad :)
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.