Well, chess programs, like any game program with a large search space, will keep track of the best moves it finds, and the longer it searches, the better it moves.
I don't know the programs here, but they might (or could be changed to, if source is available) record all the best moves it finds within, say, 30 seconds, and then compare those (assuming it isn't in the billions.)
Quite frankly, if you set aside the disbelief at such a good program (which is something chess posters here think is good enough to beat GM's in quick games) then this sounds exactly like someone is playing around.
When Win 3.1 was out, it came with a Reversi game. I put that game on hardest, and "played" it against the Mac Othello shareware, also on hardest. It handily defeated the MS version.
Next game, I put the Mac on wimpy, and let the other run on hard until only about 15-50% of tiles remained. Mac was losing badly. I jammed it up to "hard", and, lo and behold! It pulled it out against MS on "hard".
Some of these "dumb" initial moves (IANAGM) sound just like someone is goofing around, seeing how bad they can make the situation before letting the computer take over.
> From what I know, computers use libraries for
> opening moves since the choices are too wide open
> to compute. But who knows? I like the mystery
> here, because all possibilities are cool:
Unless...the computer advancement is extremely major. There's the old saw about an infinitely powerful computer saying "checkmate in 12" before the game even begins.
I did much the same thing, once, except for two differences. First, that instead of using a chess game, I played "put on too much makeup" vs. Pam Anderson and cranked the Cosmo Girl! Makeup program up to Master level.
> Looks like Linux failed, AOL is going after World Domination
AOL probably spent more money and more programmers on getting AOL to install, dial-up, and get you going on the Internet with the click of a button than the entire Linux project has consumed.
> You have to eat...So you probably buy products
> made or processed [by]...ConAgra or ADM.
Food is cheaper...and cheaper...and cheaper, year after year, and this is because of larger and more efficient farms and vertical integration. You should be on your knees, grateful that the government has largely stayed out of this.
> You want a computer? You're buying hardware from
> a plethora of large computer companies, even if
> you're eating or not paying the Microsoft Tax.
Cheaper...and cheaper...and cheaper.
> If you don't have health insurance, who is it
> that guarantees you will (eventually) get
> treated at a hospital ER? The govment.
And who makes sure we're at a 2001 level of medical technology, as opposed to 1980, with even stronger government, or arguably 2020 with weaker government. Woo-hoo! I've got free, 1884 health care! Penny-wise, pound foolish is that bargain.
> Want to start a business? who ensures you can do
> that? The govment.
Yes! Yes! It is the proper role of government to ensure freedoms! Yes!
> Although it is hard to see how tax dollars
> support this, would Microsoft let you get into
> the computer business? Would Microsoft legislate
> Linux away if it could? Yep.
But it only could if the government was improperly formed on principles that allowed the government to grant coercive monopolies, which is in direct contradiction to securing freedoms.
How did Nike "force out local businesses"? If they bribed the government to send in troops to put them out of business, that's bad.
If they paid such a high wage that no local business could compete, to the extent that Nike also hired all available locals, well, that sounds like BS since that many better-paid workers would invite "immigrants" from the next city over to run stores and what-not.
I don't know this Nike situation. I just want to know how they "forced" other businesses out of business. If they used the government, point the finger of blame at government, not at Nike.
Does Nike literally force people to work there, or do they merely offer a better job, however horrid it might be to ivory western sensibilities, than their local third world "economy" offers? If the latter, then they are part of the good solution, not part of the problem.
Yes, because we know that nobody buys anything other than computers, Internet access, console games, and Time Magazine. They've got the whole world tied up.
If he's a real businessman, the Italians will be lucky because he'll do away with a lot of the socialist nonsense and return Italy to it's Renaissance days.
> The courts ruled that the guards had done The
> Right Thing, setting the precident for corporate
> security forces.
Actually, the guards did the right thing even if they were transporting bread and butter with big signs on the sides of the truck saying "Hey! We've got bread and butter in here! Get away, starving people!"
That the people were starving is far more likely due to government intervention than corporations, regardless of the fantasy world an author wishes to create.
> When the corporations get their own militaries
> and have wars, I'll be scared.
Yes, with governments in control, things have been just peachy the last few thousand years, haven't they?
A government (US, Rome, British Empire, etc.) does best when they open and keep the trade routes flowing. When they switch to domineering the people, things break down right on schedule.
> we will have to wait until the big up coming
> Revolution of the less mindless people getting fed
> up about it within the next decade.
I think you accidently put in the word less.
> Some will stand up and change the world
Most certainly. This is what the thugs who rule with an iron fist count on. Enraging the hoi polloi at a minor or even phantom "problem", and suggesting that they, if you help them break skulls, will fix things! Really! They promise!
> Most people in Europe don't even know CNN exists.
Very true. I was in Europe during the Gulf War, and the BBC was where it was at (as an English speaker on the continent.)
I even remember the CNN guys bragging about how brave they were during the 3-day ground war, hiding in their hotel. Meanwhile, some BBC people drove around the streets filming things, a shot-up mural of Saddam, etc. and got stopped, detained, then sent back to the hotel in all the confusion.
By being neutral, all they do is put off falling to a dictator by a few years, should that dictator prevail elsewhere. Luck them that others died by the millions to save Europe.
> Governments? Corporations? Two sides of same
> intentionally-devalued coin. A pox on both their
> houses.
I'll take corporations over government any day. Corporations can't hire an army and force me to buy their product, or force the competitors out of business. As much as a corporation might "rip off people" at their very worst (MS, or Standard Oil, or the various trusts at the turn of the century) the product they provide is always more plentiful and cheaper (and more advanced, larger delta year after year) than whatever the government would do, should they get involved.
Nah, the really big companies may not have 37 billion dollars in cash with no debt, but if Gates tried to get into, say, the auto market, you'd see his stock value drop by 95% in about two days.
Those companies are still riding on speculation. Once an OS and the hardware get "good enough", the profits will start to decline and the market will move from novelty into long-term growth, which means cutting costs.
This isn't a troll, it's a brilliant comment. Where's my metamod whackstick...
I am not a unix guru (well, not to the full 32 bits, anyway) so I'd like to know what the original designers thought when using 31 bits, what was the last one reserved for?
Slashdot Mirror
Well, chess programs, like any game program with a large search space, will keep track of the best moves it finds, and the longer it searches, the better it moves.
I don't know the programs here, but they might (or could be changed to, if source is available) record all the best moves it finds within, say, 30 seconds, and then compare those (assuming it isn't in the billions.)
Quite frankly, if you set aside the disbelief at such a good program (which is something chess posters here think is good enough to beat GM's in quick games) then this sounds exactly like someone is playing around.
When Win 3.1 was out, it came with a Reversi game. I put that game on hardest, and "played" it against the Mac Othello shareware, also on hardest. It handily defeated the MS version.
Next game, I put the Mac on wimpy, and let the other run on hard until only about 15-50% of tiles remained. Mac was losing badly. I jammed it up to "hard", and, lo and behold! It pulled it out against MS on "hard".
Some of these "dumb" initial moves (IANAGM) sound just like someone is goofing around, seeing how bad they can make the situation before letting the computer take over.
> From what I know, computers use libraries for
> opening moves since the choices are too wide open
> to compute. But who knows? I like the mystery
> here, because all possibilities are cool:
Unless...the computer advancement is extremely major. There's the old saw about an infinitely powerful computer saying "checkmate in 12" before the game even begins.
> They still do...
And rightly so, although now we see the economic results of the communist "experiments", so a large scale return to that is going nowhere fast.
Even with the most powerful of computers, Garbage In, Garbage Out.
I did much the same thing, once, except for two differences. First, that instead of using a chess game, I played "put on too much makeup" vs. Pam Anderson and cranked the Cosmo Girl! Makeup program up to Master level.
Second, she still won.
> Looks like Linux failed, AOL is going after World Domination
AOL probably spent more money and more programmers on getting AOL to install, dial-up, and get you going on the Internet with the click of a button than the entire Linux project has consumed.
Linux needs to read this.
Since I like hrefs, read this and this, too.
> You have to eat...So you probably buy products
> made or processed [by]...ConAgra or ADM.
Food is cheaper...and cheaper...and cheaper, year after year, and this is because of larger and more efficient farms and vertical integration. You should be on your knees, grateful that the government has largely stayed out of this.
> You want a computer? You're buying hardware from
> a plethora of large computer companies, even if
> you're eating or not paying the Microsoft Tax.
Cheaper...and cheaper...and cheaper.
> If you don't have health insurance, who is it
> that guarantees you will (eventually) get
> treated at a hospital ER? The govment.
And who makes sure we're at a 2001 level of medical technology, as opposed to 1980, with even stronger government, or arguably 2020 with weaker government. Woo-hoo! I've got free, 1884 health care! Penny-wise, pound foolish is that bargain.
> Want to start a business? who ensures you can do
> that? The govment.
Yes! Yes! It is the proper role of government to ensure freedoms! Yes!
> Although it is hard to see how tax dollars
> support this, would Microsoft let you get into
> the computer business? Would Microsoft legislate
> Linux away if it could? Yep.
But it only could if the government was improperly formed on principles that allowed the government to grant coercive monopolies, which is in direct contradiction to securing freedoms.
> This is great news for all of us. We finally have
> a company that would challenge Microsoft.
This is great news for all of us. We finally have a company that would challenge IBM. - Me, you, everyone, about 12 years ago.
How did Nike "force out local businesses"? If they bribed the government to send in troops to put them out of business, that's bad.
If they paid such a high wage that no local business could compete, to the extent that Nike also hired all available locals, well, that sounds like BS since that many better-paid workers would invite "immigrants" from the next city over to run stores and what-not.
I don't know this Nike situation. I just want to know how they "forced" other businesses out of business. If they used the government, point the finger of blame at government, not at Nike.
Does Nike literally force people to work there, or do they merely offer a better job, however horrid it might be to ivory western sensibilities, than their local third world "economy" offers? If the latter, then they are part of the good solution, not part of the problem.
Nah, nothing will ever beat Omni Consumer Products.
Too bad, they might just turn Detroit from a crime-ridden, high-taxation, socialist kleptocracy into a throbbing, vibrant city.
> I'll take evil government over evil corporation
Take a look around you, and see the results of that decision.
> but I have not lived in a country that can
> disappear its citizens at will (Chile, Argentina,
> Soviet Union, China, etc etc etc)...
Come on over to the dark side. You've stepped up to the brink and looked in. Now jump!
> One day* the galaxy is sold on ebay through money
> order to a being of infinite horror.
To socialists, no doubt.
> But to play a DVD movie, you need to license the
> CSS decryption system for an exorbinant sum.
Like the hideous sum of $5.00 per unit, no doubt. Oh my god, the hideousness of it all.
Let's get government involved and they'll get the price down to thousands of dollars per unit.
Yes, because we know that nobody buys anything other than computers, Internet access, console games, and Time Magazine. They've got the whole world tied up.
Wait! I forgot about cars.
Oh, and houses.
Oh, and tables and chairs.
Oh, and vases.
Oh, and couches.
Oh, and curtains.
Oh, and girders.
Oh, and mirrors.
Oh, and chemicals.
Oh, and cherry tomatoes.
Oh, and everything minus a handful of products.
If he's a real businessman, the Italians will be lucky because he'll do away with a lot of the socialist nonsense and return Italy to it's Renaissance days.
> The courts ruled that the guards had done The
> Right Thing, setting the precident for corporate
> security forces.
Actually, the guards did the right thing even if they were transporting bread and butter with big signs on the sides of the truck saying "Hey! We've got bread and butter in here! Get away, starving people!"
That the people were starving is far more likely due to government intervention than corporations, regardless of the fantasy world an author wishes to create.
> When the corporations get their own militaries
> and have wars, I'll be scared.
Yes, with governments in control, things have been just peachy the last few thousand years, haven't they?
A government (US, Rome, British Empire, etc.) does best when they open and keep the trade routes flowing. When they switch to domineering the people, things break down right on schedule.
> we will have to wait until the big up coming
> Revolution of the less mindless people getting fed
> up about it within the next decade.
I think you accidently put in the word less.
> Some will stand up and change the world
Most certainly. This is what the thugs who rule with an iron fist count on. Enraging the hoi polloi at a minor or even phantom "problem", and suggesting that they, if you help them break skulls, will fix things! Really! They promise!
> Most people in Europe don't even know CNN exists.
Very true. I was in Europe during the Gulf War, and the BBC was where it was at (as an English speaker on the continent.)
I even remember the CNN guys bragging about how brave they were during the 3-day ground war, hiding in their hotel. Meanwhile, some BBC people drove around the streets filming things, a shot-up mural of Saddam, etc. and got stopped, detained, then sent back to the hotel in all the confusion.
> No corporation could *ever* gain enough power to defeat a government.
That's too bad. Governments kill a lot more than corporations do, and violate rights where a corporation never could.
By being neutral, all they do is put off falling to a dictator by a few years, should that dictator prevail elsewhere. Luck them that others died by the millions to save Europe.
> Governments? Corporations? Two sides of same
> intentionally-devalued coin. A pox on both their
> houses.
I'll take corporations over government any day. Corporations can't hire an army and force me to buy their product, or force the competitors out of business. As much as a corporation might "rip off people" at their very worst (MS, or Standard Oil, or the various trusts at the turn of the century) the product they provide is always more plentiful and cheaper (and more advanced, larger delta year after year) than whatever the government would do, should they get involved.
Nah, the really big companies may not have 37 billion dollars in cash with no debt, but if Gates tried to get into, say, the auto market, you'd see his stock value drop by 95% in about two days.
Those companies are still riding on speculation. Once an OS and the hardware get "good enough", the profits will start to decline and the market will move from novelty into long-term growth, which means cutting costs.
This isn't a troll, it's a brilliant comment. Where's my metamod whackstick...
I am not a unix guru (well, not to the full 32 bits, anyway) so I'd like to know what the original designers thought when using 31 bits, what was the last one reserved for?