It has no will to win, it fears not losing. It just calculates. ...>

It uses an algorithm and picks the best *solution* according to his evaluation function. And it just *hopes* this produces a win. Which today it does constantly against 98% of players.

I don't think it hopes. They usually have it all worked out. Hope chess is a human trait.

Another lad mentioned: "Houdini sacrifices 3 pawns for initiative."

A computer does not know what the initiative is. That is us putting human thinking into the play of a machine.

HeMateMe thinks Tal would love this era.

Then we recall the Tal quote.

"You must take your opponent into a deep dark forest where 2+2=5, and the path leading out is only wide enough for one."

2+2=5 will never compute.

Talking programming is beyond my pay grade, but let me take a shot at this. I think it'd be rather simple to program a little subroutine to play a sub-optimal move based on the resulting position. Something like:

More Human Than Human

Stockfish vs Jonny, 2014

click for larger view

Komodo-10-64bit:

+0.30/40 22.Nac4 Kg8 23.Qa3 f6 24.Nf3 Nd3 25.Rfc1 Nxc1 26.Rxc1 Nb4 27.Ne1 g6 28.Nxc2 Nxc2 29.Rxc2 Kg7 30.g3 Rhd8 31.h3 Rd7 32.Ra2 Ra8 33.Nb2 Qc1+ 34.Kh2 Rb7 35.Nd3 Qxa3 36.Rxa3 Rb5 37.Nc5 Kf7 38.Kg2 Ke7 39.Ra4 Rb4 40.Ra1 Kd6 41.Kf3 Kd5 42.Kf4 h6 43.Ra2 Rbb8 44.h4 Rb4 45.g4 g5+ 46.hxg5 fxg5+ 47.Kg3 Rbb8

Thanks for the link, seen it before, still as unimpressed now as I was then. I see they made it GOTD. What's next? 'Sportsman of the Year.'

Here:

Substitute 'song. for 'game.'

Even the most primitive computer possesses knowledge. Actually anything connected with some kind of explicit or implicit database does.

Just as easy is the answer whether a computer is conscious - a clear "no".

With intelligence, there are debates. I'm on the "yes" side, because most of the "no" arguments IMO mix it up with consciousness. Intelligence is the ability to perform some tasks for which we humans require thinking. It is not necessarily being aware of that ability (after all, already the word "aware" suggests consciousness). In this sense, computers are intelligent, though their intelligence is specific, not general (IBM's Watson may be the first step towards general intelligence).

The pyramid is this:

Knowledge < specific intelligence < general intelligence < consciousness.

Each "bigger" part cannot exist if the smaller part is absent. Chess computers are on the specific intelligence level. Modern computer technology generally somewhere in between specific and general intelligence.

Anyway, humans have access to a really pretty good assortment of tools to operate.

Maybe you should keep your shoulds to yourself.

Weird expectations for a public forum.

<And to compare consciousness to flying to prove a point is quite an obtuse idea. Perhaps you should choose another>

Komodo also gained 2 rating points for its effort...

In competitions like TCEC's it seems like the machines use book for the first half dozen or so moves. Does the computer pick which book opening is played? If not, how is it decided?

Given the advance in machine learning, I'd guess that a high powered computer with an adequate database could narrow down the entire chess opening spectrum and distill the best array of lines that could gain an advantage for white and conversely always or just about equalize for black. This computer program would not be interested in anything else but finding those best "sure fire" openings. With criteria, say, position after move 16. or so.

Has anyone heard of any development efforts for such a program?

In my opinion, it is almost impossible, because the number of possible openings is almost unlimited. For machine learning, we need to know the best moves so that machine can learn them, which is almost impossible also.