Re: Guessing?

On Jul 14, 9:30 pm, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> JOG wrote:
> > On Jul 14, 6:53 pm, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> >>JOG wrote:
>
> >>>On Jul 14, 5:45 pm, Marshall <marshall.spi..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>On Jul 13, 9:07 am, JOG <j..._at_cs.nott.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>The greatest weakness in the entire debate, however,
> >>>>>>>is the capacity issue. Lack of computing capacity is
> >>>>>>>a complete explanation for what computers can't do (yet.)
>
> >>>>><splutter/>
>
> >>>>>Ok, this one is just ridiculous. Lets take the bastion of good old
> >>>>>fashioned AI - chess. In the 90's the chess AI "deep blue" was
> >>>>>processing over 200 million board positions a second. That's right.
> >>>>>200 millions every single second. Let's compare that to a grand
> >>>>>master, who can examine about 8. Yup, that's 199,999,992 less
> >>>>>positions per second than the AI.
>
> >>>>Hey! You've been complaining about the other side's simplistic
> >>>>analyses, but here you're doing exactly the same thing. Deep
> >>>>Blue included special purpose hardware for playing chess, as
> >>>>well as dozens of general purpose CPUs. And you're claiming
> >>>>it's looking at 25 million times as many positions per second.
> >>>>Yet, Deep Blue lost to Kasparov, and Deeper Blue only just
> >>>>managed to eke out a victory. So, the 25 million number is
> >>>>crap, isn't it?
>
> >>>C'monnnn, its incredible. Examining 8 positions per second vs 200
> >>>million.
>
> >>I question your assertion. Perhaps consciously considering 8 positions
> >>per second, but obviously processing orders of magnitude more positions
> >>unconsciously.
>
> > There is nothing obvious about it, and as far as I know you are wrong
> > to question it. Both amateurs and grandmasters are thought to consider
> > (relatively) few moves, the advantage of the expert lying in memory,
> > pattern recognition and generalization (specifically visual-spatial),
> > not positions considered per second.
>
> But those are just ways to consider many positions per second.

Bollocks. In what bizarro world does not considering something = considering it. You are confusing coming up with a good solution with the strategy used to get there.

>
> > The question that should be asked therefore is how the grandmaster
> > manages to ignore the millions of possibilities that the chess
> > computer is too stupid to. Grandmasters don't have to process the
> > other millions of board positions because they don't even consider
> > them, period.
>
> Again, I question your assertion.
>
> I am happy to expand if you are interested even though
>
> > its OT. Regards, J.
>
> Sure. But how do you establish that the brain isn't doing processing
> unconsciously?
Received on Mon Jul 14 2008 - 22:58:07 CEST