----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Brin-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2002 7:49 PM Subject: Re: SCOUTED: Science Meets Spirituality, and Wireless Nanotech VR
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2002 at 07:36:47PM -0600, Dan Minette wrote: > > > With such horsepower, it was able to examine more plys ahead than any > > human. Even though it's analysis was based on a simple algorithm: the > > ability to pick the move that gave the best postion after, say, 10 > > moves on either side, was usually enough. > > > > The point is that, the best way for a computer to compete against > > a human is brute force power. Even in a situation where it seems > > straightforward to develop algorithms to define the human thought > > process: brute force beats the best algorithms. > > Maybe good chess players are doing a (mostly subconscious) massively > parallel computation of similar complexity to what the computer is > doing? It is highly unlikely. Even the best chess players can make mistakes a 1600 rated computer program would not. Karpov, for example, dropped his queen in a two-mover in a chess tournament. I feel embarassed when I do that. Yet, in that same game, IIRC, he had a nuanced understanding of how things would probably look, in general, in 20 moves. Dan M.
