M ANSARI wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 4:56 pm
I never understood why Deep Blue was dismantled and scrapped. Surely the hardware was worthless and having the machine historically preserved for future generations would have been the right thing to do. That was a major milestone historically and that machine belonged in a museum for furture generations to see and experience. Whoever decided to scrap the machine should be vilified forever. It would have been interesting to see how Deep Blue would have fared against SF 15.1 NNUE ... my guess that in a 100 game match it would lose every single game.
I think that more interesting to see how Deep Blue would have fared against the best software of 1997 when you give it the best hardware of today.
The Deep Blue intrigue
During the 9th World Chess Computer Chess Championship (June '99) held in the university of Paderborn, Germany ... During the spare time of 2 rounds we took the opportunity to test DBJ [Deep Blue Junior] to see how strong it really was. 6 games were played, Christophe Theron operated his Chess Tiger on a simple laptop of 166Mhz and got 3 draws. Ed Schrôder on his laptop of 333Mhz even got 3 wins with Rebel Century.
Does anyone recall the configuration of Deep Blue Junior that appeared in some road shows after the 1997 match? I loosely recall that it was a single-board configuration and thus weaker than even the 1996 edition that played in the 1996 Kasparov match.
Evidently the PR look of the 6 game blitz match of DBJ against Tiger/Rebel was so bad that IBM insisted on it being memory-holed.
Cardoso wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:31 pm
ChatGPT is amazing, it seems to have an answer to almost everything.
One could argue that ChatGPT is good at 'mansplaining'...
And that is a word nowadays only because objective truth is considered hurtful.
You don't seem to understand the definition.
In any case - congratulations! That was spoken like the true representative of a sex which has had it's eyes closed to what it has been doing for centuries!
Cardoso wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:31 pm
ChatGPT is amazing, it seems to have an answer to almost everything.
One could argue that ChatGPT is good at 'mansplaining'...
And that is a word nowadays only because objective truth is considered hurtful.
You don't seem to understand the definition.
In any case - congratulations! That was spoken like the true representative of a sex which has had it's eyes closed to what it has been doing for centuries!
Cardoso wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:31 pm
ChatGPT is amazing, it seems to have an answer to almost everything.
One could argue that ChatGPT is good at 'mansplaining'...
And that is a word nowadays only because objective truth is considered hurtful.
You don't seem to understand the definition.
In any case - congratulations! That was spoken like the true representative of a sex which has had it's eyes closed to what it has been doing for centuries!
You are mansplaining now.
Sorry, no...and I don't care to engage in a debate about this - it tears down WAY too many threads here. You can have the last word if you need to. But mansplaining has nothing to do with your contention that it has to do with "objective truth" or it being considered "hurtful" Let me close by saying I just now googled the terms 'mainsplaining and ChatGPT' and found this...which proves I am not the first to have noticed...far from it.
"Mainsplaining as a service - that could be chat gpt's new tag line"
He says "One thing you should know about ChatGTP is that...it's not smart - it's got internal logic within what it's posting. What that means is, when it gives you an answer...IT CONFIDENTLY GIVES YOU THE ANSWER that is what it thinks is the most logical series of words that answers your question...whether or not it's true"...adding "a lot of times it is just wrong"...fact check that was it told you is actually true...right now,...like a guy, 'it will just answer you'.
It will of course get better.
Probably quicker than we men in all likelihood.
Cardoso wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:31 pm
ChatGPT is amazing, it seems to have an answer to almost everything.
One could argue that ChatGPT is good at 'mansplaining'...
And that is a word nowadays only because objective truth is considered hurtful.
You don't seem to understand the definition.
In any case - congratulations! That was spoken like the true representative of a sex which has had it's eyes closed to what it has been doing for centuries!
You are mansplaining now.
Sorry, no...and I don't care to engage in a debate about this - it tears down WAY too many threads here. You can have the last word if you need to. But mansplaining has nothing to do with your contention that it has to do with "objective truth" or it being considered "hurtful"
I have seen many such cases on Twitter. People whining when someone tells them they got a basic fact underpinning their tweets completely wrong.
No, people do not complain because they are corrected wrongly. They complain because they are corrected at all.
