Slashdot Mirror


1770 Mechanical Chess Player Inspired Babbage

dipfan writes "A new book tells the extraordinary true story of a clock-work chess-playing "machine" named The Turk that wowed Europe and the US in the 18th and 19th century, beating Benjamin Franklin and Napoleon, among others. Although it turned out to be a cleverly designed trick, the device is credited with inspiring Charles Babbage (the father of the computer), who played and lost to the automaton in 1820, with the idea that a mechanical engine could be programed to perform tasks... and the rest is computing history, right up to IBM's Deep Blue. There's an article by the author at Wired, and the preface and first chapter of the book The Mechanical Turk available online."

6 of 160 comments (clear)

  1. The Turk is no different than chess programs today by scubacuda · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How is The Turk different than modern chess programs today?

    Even the best chess programs (Big Blue, etc.) today require the input of humans. They are given instructions, and apply those instructions in a "brute force" fashion to all data in its parameters. The vast majority of the calculations that a computer is asked to make is pure bullshit.

    Human intelligence will always have the distinct advantage of eliminating a lot of worthless calculations.

  2. Good read... by powerlinekid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Very interesting article... however I find it unfortunate that we don't know how he pulled the hoax off. Based on what I know about automata, it may be very possible to build a chess playing machine. However doing this a hundred+ years ago? I doubt it mostly due to the fact that creating the gears and other mechanisms needed required an amazing amount of time, skill and perfection. In fact this is why I heard Babbage's machine didn't work and the project fell through. I believe someone recently (if someone can find a article for this) built babbage's machine using the old blue-prints and it worked. Another thing is, if this is a hoax I wonder who was the playing the chess. The article definitly points out that the machine was very good at what it did. They only mention one case of it being beaten (along with the napoleon incident), which would mean whoever was playing was damn good. If someone was that good, why would they hide behind the guise of a machine and not reap the benefits of being one of the best chess players in the world? Oh well, definitly a good read though.
    Oh one more thing, the duck? They mention that it could take food out of a hand... how the hell did it do this? The last time I checked, motion sensors, digital cameras and such hadn't been invented yet. How the hell did the thing see where it was going, and have the ability to interact with a specific location?

    --

    can't sleep slashdot will eat me
    1. Re:Good read... by Restil · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even if you're REALLY good at something, if you play against someone whom you consider or assume to be considerably inferior to you, you will tend to unconsiously dumb down your strategy, and then even if you're a grandmaster, anyone of relatively decent skill will be able to beat you.

      The people playing the Turk weren't really playing to win. They were playing to see if this machine could play the game. They were too amazed by its ability to play AT ALL to bother much with trying to beat it. They might even intentionally make stupid "I wonder if he'll catch this" mistakes which ultimately sacrifice the game for them, no matter HOW good they might be.

      Probably the only time it got beat was the one time that someone actually paid attention to the game itself, rather than the opposing player.

      -Restil

      --
      Play with my webcams and lights here
  3. robotic arm by bpb213 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "That would still be a challenging task for a robotic arm today"

    Not hardly. Mechanically extremely easy, we just have to write the software :)

    --

    This .sig looking for creative and witty saying.
  4. Alan Turing by benthesinister · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Turing talked a lot about the Babbage Engine in his famous essay "Can Machines Think?" While that fact has very little bearing upon the article, Turing's essay touches upon the meaning of what it means to be human and whether it can be replicated. The Babbage Engine was his way of disproving that electricity is what makes humans human. Effectively it also banished the notion that it is any physical or quantifiable thing that makes humans human.

  5. and what about Blaise Pascal ? by dario_moreno · · Score: 2, Insightful


    an almost forgotten programming language
    bears his name, because he was the one,
    about 1660, to build the first adding
    and multiplying machine....Babbage
    was surely aware of his work !

    --
    Google passes Turing test : see my journal