Author: José Carlos
Date: 06:05:59 05/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 23, 2002 at 18:59:36, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On May 23, 2002 at 18:00:04, José Carlos wrote: > >> I'll try to make my point again. My english is also not very good, and I'd >>prefer to discuss in spanish, but since a spanish-german debate would not be >>very useful, I'll try to say it in english. >> If I understand you right (correct me if I'm wrong) you try to find a solution >>for the actual situation of FIDE refusing computers in official tournaments. > >José, let me differentiate. My main idea resulted from the event in the >Netherlands' National where some players made a ridiculous protest. Tell me if >you don't know then I'll look for the links. Somewhere afterwards FIDE must have >banned computers. I do not know the exact reasons. Fact is they are banned. I >suppose because of the unfair situation. My next assumption is because of books >and tables. That is how it happened that I thout it a good idea to probe >possible changes in computerchess. I did not even think about the later problems >of how to interest FIDE and the like. I don't know about that event in the Netherlands. >>And >>you say (I'm not informed about this) that FIDE rejects programs because they >>say they cheat "reading" books. > >Assumption. > >> Now, it is a very important point for the discussion whether you agree with >>FIDE or not. If you agree, then I'll try to exaplain why I think they're wrong. >>If you don't, then we should try to find a way to make them understand. > >Fine. Thanks. Could we discuss both? Because I am neither totally this side nor >the opposite. What I want is to see a change. Look, even if FIDE is wrong, but >please do tell me why, we had to find solutions how we could change the >situation either in FIDE or CC. But please do tell me what could be changed in >CC. I think I saw you describing something about opening books that could make >them "fair" at least better than before. > >Thanks so much. > >Rolf Tueschen Ok, two things to discuss then: 1. Why using an opening book is not important. To discuss this, we need to get into computer science. A basic program is a function. A function receives data, processes it and provide data. In our case, a chess program can be viewed as a function that receives some data (the board position, time left, game history...) and gives a result (a move in a certain time). What the function does inside concerns only to the programmer. When one of my clients needs a program to print invoices, the only thing that matters (for him) is that he provides some input to the program and the program prints an invoice. He doesn't care about how the program is done. He just care about the program does what it is meant to do. That's all. There might be some hardware restrictions. Ok, if my client can only use a PII-300, my program must be small and fast, and I can't do fancy graphical effects. Just an example. From the point of view of the programmer, the most important thing is that the program does what the user expects. If you are writing a chess program for very weak players who mostly care about the GUI, then you focus on a pretty GUI, and don't care so much about strength. If you want your program to top SSDF and win tournaments against humans, you focus on strength. But all of that is only the programmer's bussines. From outside, you don't see data structures nor search algorithmics nor heuristics nor preprocessed tables... You see a program that plays damn strong. Finally, don't forget that every single thing inside every single program on earth is human knowledge. There's no difference. If a table lookup is cheating, a sum is cheating, a loop is cheating, etc. It's all the same thing. It is like a novel, with a programmer instead of a writer. The programmer writes line after line, everything coming from his head. The machine only does, damn fast of course, what the programmer wrote there. 2. How to convince FIDE to allow programs. I'm not an expert in this regard. FIDE was created for humans. Human tournamens have a set of rules that are valid only for humans. If we start with the fact that the computer can't move the pieces itself on the board and push the clock button, everything else is not necessary. FIDE has a different set of rules for blind players. They can touch the pieces, and use a different board. I've played against blind players some times, and I got nervous seeing him moving his hands on the board an touching the pieces when I was trying to think. But I accept that. Why? Well, I respect blind people, and understand they need different rules. If we try to extrapolate this to computer players, it is much more difficult to say "I respect the computer and understand it needs different rules". I do respect the programmer, but then let the programmer play, not the computer. Bob points some interesting reasons why computers are not allowed in FIDE tournaments. I believe it is difficult to avoid it. I, having written a chess program, wouldn't like to play Fritz in an official tournament. So for me, it is ok that programs don't play in official tournaments. We have ICC and and GM challenges. That's more than enough for me. Moreover, in the next years the computers will be too strong to make playing against humans not interesting. Just my opinion. José C.
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.