Like I mentioned earlier. Your definition is just wrong. One of the 'sports' I use to do was Sanda. Compare that to football and you can't call football a serious sport. Or baseball. Or basketball. But luckily for the people that haven't been raised in the US, a thinking sport or mind sport is something really normal. Almost every language has word for it. In the end the difference between a game or a sport, is the effort that is put in by the guy/girl doing it and the way they look at. Is it just for relaxing? Or do I want to become better, good. Becoming better at something is a sport in itself.
You do realize that the computer event is between computers? There is no human playing there.
A draw isn't a win and Kahlen and Arinian are no Magnus.
I didn't know however about 'The baron' and I am going to look into that. Sounds very interesting.
Most of the time I just see the position and know the best move. I have a plan from the start of the game and I will try to force you onto my route. In my limited understanding of chess that is. Anyone over 2200 will beat me. The difference here is the patron recognition. That's the way most human players play chess. And sure, sometimes you don't know/see the best move. In those situations you start to count. In my case, at most 5 moves ahead with maybe, 3 different starting pieces. Really incomparable to the computer ways.
You can't compare a grandmaster that has a fabulous direct knowledge of 5000-15.000 games to a database that has every important game since the invention of notation in them. My own database at this moment holds over 15 million games, That is far beyond what any human is capable of.
Neh that just is not true. You can test this yourself if you have about a 2000-2100 rating what really isn't that high these days. Play Fisher chess against fritz, rybka... They try, sure they do, but they fail.
I don't disagree with this part. But analyzing logic for chessgames is really new btw. And it isn't they way programs like rybka and fritz win at the moment. It just isn't. I hope someday it will be, but at this point in time it just isn't.
Neh that isn't the issue. The issue is that for one reason or another English doesn't have a word for thinking sports, where practically all other languages do. It's a shortcoming of English and specifically a shortcoming of the English 'sport'. Although it isn't really English, but Americanish.
Millions? Fritz and Rybka are lucky to get 11 moves ahead if you let it run for hours! Millions of moves into the future is really bullshit. Not totally though, because in 1 thing you are right. If the database runs out they tend to try every move yes. But show me a computer and chess program that can think 14 moves ahead within 1 hour... You can't because they don't exist.
True! But, the players have advanced too. I don;t disagree with the statement that the computer will win the match. But someone like Carlsen might be able to get 1 or 2 games. And that would be awesome. But... like I said earlier. Make the computer actually play chess, with a clock, and all of a sudden you have a problem and weak opponent compared to the likes of Carlsen. As soon as the database is gone, so is the computer at this point in time. On the other hand, give Carlsen, Karpov, Kasparov, Fisher, access to the same information the computer has and unlimited time and they will find that 1 move that isn't in the database yet. That will win them the game. And that is the difference between computing chess and playing chess. At least to me. A human takes one 1 look at the board and sees. A computer without a database has to make every move, with every piece and compute what would be better in x moves from now.
Ah thanks for that link! That one is new to me. I can understand him though. There is no honour in battling the computer. With 20 million games in the database you are bound to make an error. Funny he mentions one thing I was trying to explain to some dickhead here, that computers can't play chess. They don't 'see' the position, they have to do math to get it. Having said that, I do use the computer to practice and analyse my games.
Yes chess program can try to compute every move. That is when they start losing the game. This strategy at this point in time with the current computerpower will end up taking years for a move. But yes it is an option. Just not one that gets used very much by the program, they only do it when de DB runs out;) But hey, what the hell do I know about chess. lol.
According to you. In Dutch denksport is a very common word, most languages have a word just like it. Just because the USA doesn't really like to think doesn't mean the word has no right to exist. It would be great addition to your vocabulary. The only thing stupid is saying: it has to raise your heartbeat before we call it a sport. The first question that comes to mind is: how much does it have to raise? And how much sweat do I have to lose before you would call it a sport? Hell, I was quite good at Sanda... does that mean that I can consider football not a sport? Because well... compared to Sanda, only sissies do football? Well?
What is up with you? I've read another stupid comment from you minutes ago.
It's not about boo hoo. It's about the fact that every chessgame in the world that can beat me (and there are heaps of them) use databases. The program doesn't know how to play chess. It only knows the number of wins and losses after a position and move on the board. If you think pointing such a fact out is the same as crying about it, then what the hell are you doing on slashdot?
Neh, when you play it casual it is a game. Just like jogging once a year isn't a sport. When you start training, when you enter competition, you are doing a sport. In Dutch we call these non-physical sports "denksport" that would translate to thinkingsport. A word every language should have.
What a bunch of bull shit. A 2000 player will never, ever, ever loose from a 1450 rated guy. The only time that this happens is when that 1450 guy is heavily underrated, maybe due to a lack of games. Anyone playing chess on competition level will just know that either you are lying or you aren't telling the whole story.
You know nothing about chess and why it is good for your development. That's for sure.
And about that God part? Bobby Fisher would tend to disagree if he got to play White;)
They tried that. It almost worked. Almost. The computer won, but not all games.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Blue_(chess_computer)
If they try it again, let them pick Magnus Carlsen for the game. I would love to see that match. He would have a good change at not losing all the games. But indeed, processing power and databases have become so fast and big that a computer can win from 99% of all people just by looking at former games...
The first computer-program that actual can really play chess still has to be invented.
Chess might be a game to someone who doesn't understand it. To most serious chess-players this isn't a game. Sure chess in it self is a game. But when you are studying openings for 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, when you have spend weeks analysing every game your opponent has played to give you that edge when the match is, so you might be able to get that last win you need for your grandmaster or international or regular master title... only to find out later that your opponent was a cheating son of a bitch? No sir. That ain't no game. Adults should be able not to cheat, or not to play. I would even call for a system where a caught cheater would be banned from joining any other club or sport. Not by law, but just by sport-clubs regulations. Keep my fine sport(!) chess, safe from those people.
Well yes, but you don't need to spend 250.000 to come to that conclusion:D
Despite me pointing this out, to be honest, I really dig this project. 2 thumbs up. Wish I had a chance to do something this cool. But, when you only count the costs of parts you are not getting the real cost. I didn't account the real profit either. Who cares about another shitty satellite in orbit. We have thousands of them and most of them are way more interesting than what these guys put up there. What is way more interesting here in terms of profit is that we have a couple of young people, call em kids, that have hands on knowledge on designing and building spacecraft. That is profit. In the future they will be building... well... multi million/billion spacecraft for some really cool company that's will make sure every last penning of profit will be attained;) Sweet irony. But still, awesome project with good results.
Slashdot Mirror
Not if one part of your workday consists out of 12hr shifts,swinging a pickaxe at rocks... RTFA! The guardian has the story.
Oh man, don't get me started, last time I was diving one of them Deep Sea Jews shot me in the leg with a head-mounted laser.
I would suggest to just kill it with fire.
Hi, I'm Bill. Where do you want me to go?
Like I mentioned earlier. Your definition is just wrong. One of the 'sports' I use to do was Sanda. Compare that to football and you can't call football a serious sport. Or baseball. Or basketball. But luckily for the people that haven't been raised in the US, a thinking sport or mind sport is something really normal. Almost every language has word for it. In the end the difference between a game or a sport, is the effort that is put in by the guy/girl doing it and the way they look at. Is it just for relaxing? Or do I want to become better, good. Becoming better at something is a sport in itself.
You do realize that the computer event is between computers? There is no human playing there. A draw isn't a win and Kahlen and Arinian are no Magnus. I didn't know however about 'The baron' and I am going to look into that. Sounds very interesting.
Most of the time I just see the position and know the best move. I have a plan from the start of the game and I will try to force you onto my route. In my limited understanding of chess that is. Anyone over 2200 will beat me. The difference here is the patron recognition. That's the way most human players play chess. And sure, sometimes you don't know/see the best move. In those situations you start to count. In my case, at most 5 moves ahead with maybe, 3 different starting pieces. Really incomparable to the computer ways.
Like I said earlier. If you're 2000-2100, start fritz or rybka, start a Fisher game. Let us see the game here. You will win.
You can't compare a grandmaster that has a fabulous direct knowledge of 5000-15.000 games to a database that has every important game since the invention of notation in them. My own database at this moment holds over 15 million games, That is far beyond what any human is capable of.
Neh that just is not true. You can test this yourself if you have about a 2000-2100 rating what really isn't that high these days. Play Fisher chess against fritz, rybka... They try, sure they do, but they fail.
I don't disagree with this part. But analyzing logic for chessgames is really new btw. And it isn't they way programs like rybka and fritz win at the moment. It just isn't. I hope someday it will be, but at this point in time it just isn't.
Neh that isn't the issue. The issue is that for one reason or another English doesn't have a word for thinking sports, where practically all other languages do. It's a shortcoming of English and specifically a shortcoming of the English 'sport'. Although it isn't really English, but Americanish.
Millions? Fritz and Rybka are lucky to get 11 moves ahead if you let it run for hours! Millions of moves into the future is really bullshit. Not totally though, because in 1 thing you are right. If the database runs out they tend to try every move yes. But show me a computer and chess program that can think 14 moves ahead within 1 hour... You can't because they don't exist.
True! But, the players have advanced too. I don;t disagree with the statement that the computer will win the match. But someone like Carlsen might be able to get 1 or 2 games. And that would be awesome. But... like I said earlier. Make the computer actually play chess, with a clock, and all of a sudden you have a problem and weak opponent compared to the likes of Carlsen. As soon as the database is gone, so is the computer at this point in time. On the other hand, give Carlsen, Karpov, Kasparov, Fisher, access to the same information the computer has and unlimited time and they will find that 1 move that isn't in the database yet. That will win them the game. And that is the difference between computing chess and playing chess. At least to me. A human takes one 1 look at the board and sees. A computer without a database has to make every move, with every piece and compute what would be better in x moves from now.
Ah thanks for that link! That one is new to me. I can understand him though. There is no honour in battling the computer. With 20 million games in the database you are bound to make an error. Funny he mentions one thing I was trying to explain to some dickhead here, that computers can't play chess. They don't 'see' the position, they have to do math to get it. Having said that, I do use the computer to practice and analyse my games.
Yes chess program can try to compute every move. That is when they start losing the game. This strategy at this point in time with the current computerpower will end up taking years for a move. But yes it is an option. Just not one that gets used very much by the program, they only do it when de DB runs out ;) But hey, what the hell do I know about chess. lol.
According to you. In Dutch denksport is a very common word, most languages have a word just like it. Just because the USA doesn't really like to think doesn't mean the word has no right to exist. It would be great addition to your vocabulary. The only thing stupid is saying: it has to raise your heartbeat before we call it a sport. The first question that comes to mind is: how much does it have to raise? And how much sweat do I have to lose before you would call it a sport? Hell, I was quite good at Sanda... does that mean that I can consider football not a sport? Because well... compared to Sanda, only sissies do football? Well?
What is up with you? I've read another stupid comment from you minutes ago. It's not about boo hoo. It's about the fact that every chessgame in the world that can beat me (and there are heaps of them) use databases. The program doesn't know how to play chess. It only knows the number of wins and losses after a position and move on the board. If you think pointing such a fact out is the same as crying about it, then what the hell are you doing on slashdot?
Neh, when you play it casual it is a game. Just like jogging once a year isn't a sport. When you start training, when you enter competition, you are doing a sport. In Dutch we call these non-physical sports "denksport" that would translate to thinkingsport. A word every language should have.
What a bunch of bull shit. A 2000 player will never, ever, ever loose from a 1450 rated guy. The only time that this happens is when that 1450 guy is heavily underrated, maybe due to a lack of games. Anyone playing chess on competition level will just know that either you are lying or you aren't telling the whole story.
You know nothing about chess and why it is good for your development. That's for sure. And about that God part? Bobby Fisher would tend to disagree if he got to play White ;)
They tried that. It almost worked. Almost. The computer won, but not all games. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Blue_(chess_computer) If they try it again, let them pick Magnus Carlsen for the game. I would love to see that match. He would have a good change at not losing all the games. But indeed, processing power and databases have become so fast and big that a computer can win from 99% of all people just by looking at former games... The first computer-program that actual can really play chess still has to be invented.
Chess might be a game to someone who doesn't understand it. To most serious chess-players this isn't a game. Sure chess in it self is a game. But when you are studying openings for 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, when you have spend weeks analysing every game your opponent has played to give you that edge when the match is, so you might be able to get that last win you need for your grandmaster or international or regular master title... only to find out later that your opponent was a cheating son of a bitch? No sir. That ain't no game. Adults should be able not to cheat, or not to play. I would even call for a system where a caught cheater would be banned from joining any other club or sport. Not by law, but just by sport-clubs regulations. Keep my fine sport(!) chess, safe from those people.
Please tell me you are not from the USA...
Well yes, but you don't need to spend 250.000 to come to that conclusion :D
Despite me pointing this out, to be honest, I really dig this project. 2 thumbs up. Wish I had a chance to do something this cool. But, when you only count the costs of parts you are not getting the real cost. I didn't account the real profit either. Who cares about another shitty satellite in orbit. We have thousands of them and most of them are way more interesting than what these guys put up there. What is way more interesting here in terms of profit is that we have a couple of young people, call em kids, that have hands on knowledge on designing and building spacecraft. That is profit. In the future they will be building... well... multi million/billion spacecraft for some really cool company that's will make sure every last penning of profit will be attained ;) Sweet irony. But still, awesome project with good results.