[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Chess programs, like Deep Fritz, have recourse to immense opening and endgame databases. So why don't the human opponents have this resource? It's not a fair fight. /Mats
I don't think computers truly test the strength of artificial intelligence through application to FIDE since computers reflect the accumulated strength of years of human scholarship and practice. A sounder test would be an exotic chess variant that is relatively unexplored. For example: Could the most advanced computer beat a panel of expert chess variant specialists at microorganism chess?
Another thought: Each chess variant is itself an artificial intelligence program. When we play them, we are merely glimpsing the inner workings of the machines we have built.
Chess is far from dead. As far as I know, no computer can yet *enjoy* a game of Chess! Example: my kid enjoys tic-tac-toe, another 'dead' game?!
No machine will ever invent a chess variant, or challenge a human to a game unless some human directs them to do so. So-called 'intelligent' machines are merely reactive, not initiative, and won't do doodle-um unless a human kickstarts them. (Shades of 'the Matrix' and 'Y2K'. Ho hum.. We da man...
Chess is far from dead when it comes down to human beings playing against other human beings. In regard to computers... yes, the silicon brains, I believe, do put a very dark cloud on many on-line games [both correspondance and real-time]. But put 2 players face-to-face in a, tournament hall, at a chess club, coffee shop, school chess work shop, or at a kitchen table and we have a great game which I imagine will continue to be played, as it is now, for a long long time to come.
Chess is dead. OK, let me rephrase that--it was hard to come up with a decent heading in 16 characters or less. Chess, as a recreation studied by humans alone is dead. With the defeat of world champion Kramnik by a computer this last October, and the failure of a human to defeat a computer in a classical tournament since the 1990s, a good move in a chess position is now found by mechanical calculation instead of human artistry. What does this mean for chess variants? It means that the study of variants will now be greatly computer assisted. This also means the end of romantic gambits--no computer will give the king's gambit or other romantic gambits a second thought. It also limits tournament options--we either allow computers to generate moves, or have a honor system that bars tournaments being played for prizes. On the other hand, it does allow the automated creation of opening books. Greg Stong did some of this work with his ChessV program; I expanded on his research to create an article for openings in a variant I have created myself. So, computers have definitely changed the landscape.
7 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.