Author: Albert Silver
Date: 17:00:21 05/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
>>In 20 years, the hardware is only 350 MHz (software writers are running short of
>>ideas to continue improving software that exploits the ever DECREASING hardware
>>limits) and the machines must be custom made since no one really makes such
>>absurdly slow processors anymore. Even the latest Casio wristwatch goes faster
>>than that! BUT, we can STILL beat the machines. Ah!...
>>
>>Looks and sounds terribly silly doesn't it? That's where it would lead to. If
>>you limit the hardware to not allow a performance beyond a certain point, what
>>exactly are you achieving?
>>
>> Albert
>
>What I achieve is an improvement in the software and an interesting competition.
First of all, software improvements will happen independently of handicapping or
not the hardware. Second of all, machines don't compete, they perform. I've been
using this example up and down this thread and I'll reiterate it here: if you
race a motorcycle, you may be competing against the bike, but the motorcycle is
certainly not *competing* agaist you.
>I think it may be interesting to know what is the worst hardware that machines
>need in order to beat humans.
Which humans? The best human player available? I think you will never find that
out. You may find out a certain point when the human loses, but once that is
achieved, I really do not believe you'll be able to rematch saying that you now
dumbed down the machine and want to see if they still lose to it because you
want to find out just how weak it must be for them to begin winning again.
If it's a question of just 2600 Elo or something, then we could probably find
the answer relatively soon, though it seems a complicated issue as some higher
rated players seem to struggle (Gurevich) whereas lower rated players
(Petrovich) do quite reasonably. Mecking is rated less than 2600 FIDE yet has a
super ICC rating by virtue of his ability to play computers, so it is not a
simple question.
>I expect to see in the next 10 years a commercial program that is going to beat
>every player in the world and in this case the question is what is the future of
>computer-human games.
The future is exhibition games, matches, and tournaments. Though eventually even
that will run out of steam I'm afraid. I don't see much media interest in
something like:
May 17, 2028 (Reuters)
PARIS, France - In the latest effort to salvage our egos, GM Killiakov, 2725
FIDE, will be playing an 8 game match against Fritz 26.3 running on the latest
Casio superwatch equipped with a WRIST-Risc 2.5 GHz processor. When asked about
his chances, the Russian player declared utter confidence, pointing out in his
favor that it was using the latest Microsoft release MiniWindows 12.5. Casio,
generously sponsoring the event, said they hope that it will be an exciting
match for all, and went on to add that their newest release comes in several
attractive designs including some clearly aimed at younger consumers such as the
black and silver Star Wars design and the flourescent pink Barbie design.
Albert
>I think that in this case it may be interesting to see what is the worst
>hardware that machines can use and still be better than humans.
>
>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.