Author: blass uri
Date: 05:53:27 02/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 15, 2000 at 07:16:12, Côme wrote: >On February 15, 2000 at 06:16:27, blass uri wrote: > >>On February 15, 2000 at 05:51:31, stuart taylor wrote: >> >>> I wonder if it will eventually be discovered that chess is not absolute, >>>and that a human will therefore always be able to beat a machine by playing >>>exactly against the weaker points of that particular machines style-everything >>>else being to perfection? >>> Maybe chess isn't an exacting art-absolutely? >>> Stuart Taylor >> >>If the machine has no weak points then it is impossible to play exactly against >>the weaker points of the machine and there is no reason to assume that it is >>impossible to do a machine with no weak points. >> >>Today there is no machine with no weaks points and there is no machine that can >>pass the turing test(every machine can do positional mistakes that I do not >>expect humans even with 1800 elo rating to do) but it is practically impossible >>for most of the humans to play exactly against the weaker points of the machine >>because you cannot go practically to the positions that the machine does not >>understand. >> >>Uri > >Hello Uri, >I don't agree with you Uri ! >It's not so hard to play against weaks points of machine ! >Best Regards >Alexandre Côme Hello Alexandre, If it is not so hard then what is the reason that these machines can beat more than 99% of the humans with rating above 1600? There are positions when the machines are stupid and humans knows about them(for example programs do not understand fortress positions when one side has a big material advantage) but you usually cannot go for these position in a practical game. Uri
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.