Slashdot Mirror


Humankind Makes Last Stand Against Machine

MrZeebo writes "According to this Financial Times story, Garry Kasparov has begun another match against a computer chess program on Sunday, this time playing against the Israeli-developed Deep Junior. Kasparov is the highest-rated chess player of all time, and lost to Deep Blue in 1997. According to the article, Deep Junior, despite evaluating less moves per minute than Deep Blue, is considered to be a superior chess player. The match will span 6 games, the last one being February 7th." Kasparov has won the first game.

2 of 401 comments (clear)

  1. Yes. by pb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's easily possible to write a program that plays a game better than the programmer; in fact, this very thing happened early on in the history of computers that play games (in this case, checkers).

    I guarantee you that Deep Blue and Deep Junior play chess better than their programmers, and for that matter, almost everyone on earth. That's why they get to play Kasparov.

    --
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
  2. Re:A different test: man versus machine by PissedOffGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    to put this another way, if the contest were to factor 20 digt numbers, no one woul dbe surprised if the machine beat a human. it would be a stupid test. Just like chess.

    a better test would be a face recognition contest. Or if we need to make it a real game then how about soccer?


    another interesting thing to note is that 50 years ago, people thought chess was a pretty damn good test of AI. now people think otherwise. when the computer recognizes faces better than you, plays soccer better than you, writes poetry better than you, steals your girlfriend, and passes the turing test, will you still think its just "following the rules"? your brain is just following the rules of physics too you know.