67.1 million cores computer by IBM

[Murat]

http://www.dailytech.com/IBM+Proposes+O ... e10612.htm

Maybe they can code build in chess engine so we can analyze our games on internet

one computer to rule them all regards

Murat:.

[Red-Gambit]

I wonder how much it cost to build

[S.Taylor]

Main question, is, how many plies would this be able to search at brute-force?

OK, so perhaps whatever the answer is, it probably isn't enough to solve chess at brute-force alone. However, with ingenious programming, would this together with that much computer poer, be able to more or less get results which would show us all what solved chess would look like?

(this should obviously mean that it would not lose more than one game in a thousand, vs any known chessplaying entity human or machine, in existence at present. Draws, might be different).

[Spock]

And a single point of failure for the entire internet ? Terrorists would love it. Somehow I think this idea is ill-conceived.

[Uri]

Today we know that software quality and not computer speed is the deciding factor in chess. We could build a quantum computer and it still won't play good chess without some mininal understanding of chess strategy (like piece mobility, control of the center, king safety etc...)

In the first Deep Blue vs. Kasparov match which Kasparov won 4-2, Deep Blue had some problems there and it wasn't speed. Lack of chess knowledge and positional understanding was its problem.

Few games where Deep Blue lost:

[Event "Internet Exhibition match"]
[Date "1995"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Miguel Illescas-Cordoba", rating ?]
[Black "Deep Blue", rating ?]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A28"]

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. d3 g6 5. e3 Bb4 6. Bd2 d6 7. Be2 Be6 8. O-O h6 9. a3 Bxc3 10. Bxc3 O-O 11. d4 e4 12. d5 exf3 13. Bxf3 Bxd5 14. cxd5 Ne5 15. Be2 Ne4 16. Ba5 Rc8 17. f3 Nf6 18. e4 Qe7 19. Bc3 c6 20. dxc6 bxc6 21. f4 Ned7 22. Bf3 Rfe8 23. Re1 d5 24. e5 Nh7 25. Bg4 Nhf8 26. Qd4 1-0

[Event "Copenhagen"]
[White "Deep Blue" rating ?]
[Black "Bjarke Kristensen" rating 2420]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C45"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 Bc5 5. Be3 Qf6 6. c3 Nge7 7. Bc4 O-O 8. O-O Qg6 9. Nb5 Bxe3 10. Nxc7 Bf4 11. Nxa8 Ne5 12. Be2 d5 13. Kh1 dxe4 14. Na3 Ng4 15. h3 Nf6 16. Qb3 Qh6 17. c4 Nc6 18. Nb5 a6 19. Nac7 axb5 20. Nxb5 Ne5 21. Nd6 Be6 22. Rfe1 Nd3 23. Nxe4 Nxe4 24. Bxd3 Bxh3 0-1

[Date "1996.??.??"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Garry Kasparov" rating 2795]
[Black "Deep Blue"]
[Result "1-0"]

1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 c6 3. c4 e6 4. Nbd2 Nf6 5. e3 c5 6. b3 Nc6 7. Bb2 cxd4 8. exd4 Be7 9. Rc1 O-O 10. Bd3 Bd7 11. O-O Nh5 12. Re1 Nf4 13. Bb1 Bd6 14. g3 Ng6 15. Ne5 Rc8 16. Nxd7 Qxd7 17. Nf3 Bb4 18. Re3 Rfd8 19. h4 Nge7 20. a3 Ba5 21. b4 Bc7 22. c5 Re8 23. Qd3 g6 24. Re2 Nf5 25. Bc3 h5 26. b5 Nce7 27. Bd2 Kg7 28. a4 Ra8 29. a5 a6 30. b6 Bb8 31. Bc2 Nc6
32. Ba4 Re7 33. Bc3 Ne5 34. dxe5 Qxa4 35. Nd4 Nxd4 36. Qxd4 Qd7 37. Bd2 Re8 38. Bg5 Rc8 39. Bf6+ Kh7 40. c6 bxc6 41. Qc5 Kh6 42. Rb2 Qb7 43. Rb4 1-0

[Ovyron]

Today we know that software quality and not computer speed is the deciding factor in chess. We could build a quantum computer and it still won't play good chess without some mininal understanding of chess strategy (like piece mobility, control of the center, king safety etc...)

Yes, but weaker software on new hardware (Like Hiarcs on a quad) is beating the strongest software on old hardware (Rybka 2.3.1 on a 1.2Ghz), so both are important.

[Chess Gator]

http://www.dailytech.com/IBM+Proposes+O ... e10612.htm

I enjoyed reading the blog comments at the end of the article, it seems most people are terrified the computer will turn into Skynet...from the movie Terminator

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_the_Tr ... _the_World

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

http://www.dailytech.com/IBM+Proposes+O ... e10612.htm

I enjoyed reading the blog comments at the end of the article, it seems most people are terrified the computer will turn into Skynet...from the movie Terminator

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_the_Tr ... _the_World

[Chess Gator]

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/IBM_to_cons ... e_Internet

IBM has announced a new project called Kittyhawk, which entails constructing a global-scale shared supercomputer to host the entire Internet on one platform as an application. Currently the Internet is a collection of interconnected computer networks.

IBM has prepared a white paper detailing the project. The Kittyhawk will be based on the previously developed IBM supercomputer called Blue Gene. In theory the Kittyhawk will have up to 16,384 racks, providing a maximum of 67.1 million cores with 32 petabytes of memory.

The Kittyhawk project has created much discussion in the technology community. One of the main topics of discussion is the comparison of Kittyhawk to Skynet the fictional supercomputer, in the movie series Terminator, which attempts to destroy all human life and take over Earth.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/IBM_to_cons ... e_Internet

IBM has announced a new project called Kittyhawk, which entails constructing a global-scale shared supercomputer to host the entire Internet on one platform as an application. Currently the Internet is a collection of interconnected computer networks.

IBM has prepared a white paper detailing the project. The Kittyhawk will be based on the previously developed IBM supercomputer called Blue Gene. In theory the Kittyhawk will have up to 16,384 racks, providing a maximum of 67.1 million cores with 32 petabytes of memory.

The Kittyhawk project has created much discussion in the technology community. One of the main topics of discussion is the comparison of Kittyhawk to Skynet the fictional supercomputer, in the movie series Terminator, which attempts to destroy all human life and take over Earth.

I am not sure if this Kitty thing will destroy the humans,but one this is for sure....hosting the entire internet on one platform as an application will make it much easier to spy on people's deals over the net hence flushing the users privacy into the toillet....