Slashdot Mirror
Chess Improves Machines and Humans Alike
erick99 writes "Chess provides a window into some more arcane philosophical matters. The remainder of this article will focus on two difficult, and interrelated, questions. The first has to do with the nature of reality; the second is about the prospects for human and artificial intelligence in grappling with reality. In both cases, the search for an answer leads through a board game with 32 pieces and 64 squares."
A group of chess enthusiasts had checked into a hotel, and were standing in the lobby discussing their recent tournament victories. After about an hour, the manager came out of the office and asked them to disperse. "But why?" they asked, as they moved off.
"Because," he said, "I can't stand chess nuts boasting in an open foyer."
Q. What's the difference between a chess player and a highway construction worker?
A. A chess player moves every now and then.
Which football team has a couple of chess pieces missing?
QPR
Q. What is the difference between a chess player and a couple on a blind date?
A. The chess player mates then chats......
Regards,
(courtesy of Graham Moore)
Q - Which group of women are the best chess players?
A - Feminists. Their opponents begin with King and Queen,
but *they* always start with 2 Queens.
That explains why I never can beat a computer at chess. Whenever I get better, the computer gets even more better!
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
This article reads like an article on chess that collided with an article on DesCartes' philosophy.
_____
Thank you.
Man, that's deep.
You misspelled "ephemeral yet useful".
At first i read it as cheese...admit it: most people here would be happier if it had really read Cheese improves humans..
Even better, GoZen, the game that can only be played by ethereal brain masses on the highest philosophical plane of existance.
Slashdot sucks
1. This is high-school grade philosophy
Actually that's pretty good by slashdot standards.
A question plagues humanity for thousands of years: "Do Platonic Ideals actually exist?"
It is not until 2004 that Slashdot User "radiumhahn" finally answers the question definatively, "Who cares?"
The Slashdot moderation "Insightful" proves the point is, indeed, insightful, and a deep and powerful question is finally laid to rest, once and for all.
Thank God for you, "radiumhahn"! Where ever would philosophy be without your "Insightful" contributions?
Don't want to flame, but the article does seem like a bunch of "pseudo-intellectual" (forgive me for using that phrase) 14 year olds sitting around, playing chess and thinking their minds are advanced. Half way through the article I thought they would break out matrix-like statements saying "there is no pawn."
Seriously, it just sounds like a half-assed book on Hume or such that somehow had pages of "Chess for Dummies" inserted randomly.
That is one search. The correct answer is 42.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.