|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 10 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Dec-10-05 | | aw1988: Going over the first game of the rematch, we see horrible positional chess. The comp calculates at 200 million positions a second, and crashes and burns. It goes to show chess isn't entirely burnt out yet... |
|
| Dec-10-05 | | WillC21: <aw1988> It's worth noting that was 8 years ago. Shredder 9 or Fritz 9 put on that hardware would be around the 3300 ELO level and the positional chess would be far from "horrible." |
|
| Dec-10-05 | | norami: The edge of the observable universe is 132 yottameters away. |
|
| Dec-10-05 | | aw1988: A fair point. |
|
| Dec-10-05 | | aw1988: <norami> LOL |
|
| Dec-24-05 | | chessmaster pro: i've seen this computer and it's amazing |
|
| Dec-24-05 | | technical draw: Hi <chessmaster pro>, welcome to the group. Weather must be great in Aruba. Your name shows ambition, good luck with your chess future. |
|
Jan-16-06
 | | BishopBerkeley: Hitachi's amusing animation on perpendicular hard-drive technology (complete with databits that dance and sing!) anticipates a 5- to 10-fold increase in data storage capacity for hard-drives, according to many industry insiders: http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/resea... (The animation requires the Macromedia Flash plugin: easy to download & install: http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave... ) With the release of Seagate's "Momentus 5400.3" hard drive, many industry insiders believe that the "perpendicular recording revolution" is about to storm into the market ("In the next three to five years, the new technology is expected to increase maximum drive capacities five fold, [one insider] said..."): http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060116... More information on the Momentus 5400.3 may be obtained at Seagate's website: http://www.seagate.com/products/not... "The industry's first perpendicular recording technology drive" (in .pdf format): http://www.seagate.com/docs/pdf/mar... Datasheet (in .pdf format):
http://www.seagate.com/docs/pdf/dat... Hitachi's perpendicular recording page:
http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/resea... PC World article on perpendicular recording technology: http://www.pcworld.com/news/article... PC World graphic on this:
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article... Well, so much for worrying about openings books that are too large!! (: ♗ Bishop Berkeley ♗ :)
|
|
| Mar-03-06 | | LluviaSean: BOOOO!! Why not give Garry his rematch?? Noone at IBM would have had played Garry himself...just let the bloody computer play the World Champ... |
|
Mar-24-06
| | BishopBerkeley: Laser chips could power petaflop computers [21 March 2006] Laser communications chips capable of pumping data through the veins of gargantuan "petaflop" supercomputers have been demonstrated by NEC in Japan. The communications chips can transfer information through optical fibres at a blistering 25 gigabits per second (a gigabit is a billion bits). This is a record for such components, according to NEC, and is many times faster that the purely electronic interconnects used in today's supercomputers...
Communications chips can convert electronic signals into optical ones. Using optical fibres to relay data between the chips is what may give this type of supercomputer the edge over previous ones using processors connected electronically.
NEC used a type of semiconducting laser diode called a Vertical-Cavity Surface Emitting Laser (VCSEL) which generates laser pulses in response to an electrical current. Researchers at the company created more efficient VCSEL devices by making the diodes from a blend of gallium arsenide and indium gallium arsenide - they used indium instead of the more conventional aluminium. This made it possible to transfer laser pulses more rapidly through optical fibre. The new VCSEL chips could be used to make supercomputers of unprecedented power by routing data more efficiently between thousands of individual computer processors. NEC believes the chips could prove crucial to the development of the first petaflop class supercomputer - a machine capable of carrying out a thousand trillion mathematical calculations every second. "Petaflop-class performance can be achieved in the next-generation supercomputer installed with the new VCSEL, in about 2010," Takahiro Nakamura from NEC's System Devices Research Laboratories told *New Scientist*.... 18:31 21 March 2006
NewScientist.com news service
Will Knight
Source:
http://www.newscientistspace.com/ar... Here is a current list of the world's most powerful computers (measured by performance in gigaflops): http://www.top500.org/lists/2005/11...
Courtesy of http://www.top500.org/
[More about the LINPACK Benchmark that is used in the ranking: http://www.top500.org/lists/linpack... ] (: ♗ Bishop Berkeley ♗ :)
|
|
Apr-08-06
| | BishopBerkeley: Stanley Kubrick on Chess:
"You sit at the board and suddenly your heart leaps. Your hand trembles to pick up the piece and move it. But what chess teaches you is that you must sit there calmly and think about whether it’s really a good idea and whether there are other, better ideas..." Newsweek 26 May 1980
http://www.bartleby.com/63/62/8862....
(: ♗ Bishop Berkeley ♗ :)
|
|
Apr-10-06
| | BishopBerkeley: What if it were announced that "a supercomputer has played through all possible continuations of the Ruy Lopez, and it has been show to be a DRAW"? Well, something like this has happened in the world of Checkers/Draughts. (But I think it is highly unlikely that it will happen in the Chess world any time soon!) Like Chess, Checkers/Draughts has standard openings. One of those openings, called the "White Doctor", has been tentatively shown to be a draw when played maximally well by both sides: the Checkers/Draughts-playing supercomputer Chinook (at the University of Alberta in Canada) has provided this tentative proof: http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~chinook/
The Chinook team also believes a second standard opening (lacking a snazzy name, but indicated by the opening moves 09-13 21-17 05-09 ) is also a proven draw. All quite interesting!
(: ♗ Bishop Berkeley ♗ :)
|
|
| Apr-11-06 | | Whitehat1963: Has Deep Blue lost a match since it beat Kasparov? What? It hasn't? Then it must be the World Chess Champion! Wait, neither has Fischer. O.K., then Fischer needs to play Deep Blue to decide the undisputed champion. Then Kramnik can play the winner as the first challenger. The winner of that match plays Topalov. Then Hydra can challenge the winner of that match. Come on FIDE, what's holding all of this up? The chess world holds its breath. We need an undisputed world title holder. My formula would settle it. |
|
| Apr-11-06 | | alicefujimori: <Whitehat1963>LOL
Talking about Deep Blue, at least Kasparov wasn't given a copy of Deep Blue to have a couple of months to prepare against for their match. (Unlike Kramnik, who was given a copy of Deep Fritz to prepare against.) |
|
| Apr-11-06 | | square dance: <alicefujimori> <Talking about Deep Blue, at least Kasparov wasn't given a copy of Deep Blue to have a couple of months to prepare against for their match. (Unlike Kramnik, who was given a copy of Deep Fritz to prepare against.)> you say this like its an insult towards kramnik. why? kasparov was given a copy of the program(fritz or junior. maybe both.) prior to one of his man vs machine matches. computers already have enough of an advantage without humans being able to prepare for its style. |
|
Apr-11-06
| | BishopBerkeley: <Whitehat1963> But alas! Deep Blue has gone on to that Great Data Center in the Sky! It has achieved Nerdvana! It has shuffled off this mortal Faraday coil, rung down the curtain, and joined the Choir Invisible (or is that the Norwegian Blue I'm thinking of?!? (Beautiful plumage, the Norwegian Blue... http://www.gruntdoc.com/pics/norweg... ) ) I think Deep Blue is probably jousting with Paul Morphy or Jose Raul Capablanca at this moment, or beating up on Alan Turing !! But I'm afraid its days of this-worldly glory have gone the way of all silicon... Requiescat in Pace, Blue Profundus!
(: ♗ Bishop Berkeley ♗ :)
|
|
| Apr-11-06 | | alicefujimori: <square dance><you say this like its an insult towards kramnik>There is no insult to Kramnik. The stress of that fact was to emphasize the difference between the two human VS machine match and the difficulty that Kasparov had to face against Deep Blue in 1997 compared to Kramnik's match against Deep Fritz in (2002?). Especially when the Deep Blue team can tune the machine after every game. |
|
| Apr-11-06 | | square dance: <Especially when the Deep Blue team can tune the machine after every game.> yes, that was absolutely absurd imo. |
|
| Apr-11-06 | | ennar: Did anyone see the movie "Game over"?
It strongly suggests that the IBM cheated - especially in Game 2 by using grandmaster(s) to help Deep Blue (by cutting off fruitless paths etc). In Game 2, Kasparov was so bewildered by "human like" moves from Deep Blue that he persumably resigned in a position where he had a perpetual check! This is offered as further proof of cheating by IBM. How could such a powerful computer miss a simple perpetual check? After Game 2, Kasparov was psychologically beaten and din't offer much resistance. |
|
| Apr-11-06 | | Whitehat1963: <Bishop Berkeley>, he looks like he's pushing up daisies; he's kicked the bucket. THAT is a LATE PARROT! |
|
| Apr-11-06 | | Akavall: <ennar> Analysis of Game 2 seem to be pretty strong evidence against Deep Blue. One should also remember that this match was very important to IBM from financial stand-point; IBM stocks went up 15% after Deep Blue won the match. |
|
| Apr-11-06 | | who: <ennar> I'm not sure what you mean Kasparov didn't offer much resistance, but he did draw the next 3 games. Also what do you mean "he persumably resigned in a position where he had a perpetual check!." He did resign a position where he had a perpetual check and if 'presumably' refers to the reason he resigned, that's probably because he thought a computer wouldn't make a mistake - not because the moves were humanlike. As regards the computer making human-like moves, Feng-Hsiung Hsu (who programmed deep blue) discusses this in his book about the match. There was a bug in the code where if a position was reached that had been analyzed already the computer went to the old analysis without noting that the position had been repeated. This means it should in fact be almost impossible for the computer to realize that it was entering a 3-fold repition. There were other bugs, some of which caused the loss of the first games. |
|
| Apr-11-06 | | Gregor Samsa Mendel: <who> Little ChessPartner might have a bug similar to the one just described. I've taken advantage of it a number of times to obtain endless repetitions in positions where it was beating the living tar out of me. :D |
|
Apr-11-06
| | BishopBerkeley: <Whitehat1963> He's just restin', squire! (: ♗ Bishop Berkeley ♗ :)
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~ebarnes/p... |
|
| Apr-12-06 | | acirce: <Analysis of Game 2 seem to be pretty strong evidence against Deep Blue.> I think there is simply no evidence at all. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 10 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
