> Interest in available engines to run on available software is practical. Interest in non-available engines is academic. The former is the domain of the practical, the latter the domain of the dreamer.
Very true! In my professional life I am a musician and I do dream and strive for things that are somewhat out of my grasp. (and often even manage to land them!!)
As chess is a hobby I choose to dream about the MOST LIKELY unattainable goal of becoming master strength.
> You are only interested in things you can / will own? That's hard to understand.
> There are so many things that I will never own - for example a war bird, a Corvette or a rocket. Still I think they are really fascinating.
Well actually all I said was that my interest in a cluster is negligible.
And the examples of a rocket and a corvette or not even relevant. Cars and rocket science are not my hobby. Chess and getting better at it is my hobby. That is what I find fascinating. So although the odds of me ever playing at Grandmaster level are obviosuly LOW, I still find that fascinating and worthy of pursuing and studying. So it would be wise to make sure that your analogies hold water before you throw them out there.
As I have limited time I WOULD rather focus on engines and software that will work and perform well on the hardware I have or would likely get in the near future. This again helps me to focus on what I find fascinating.
Another part of that hobby is following certain chess competitions. And as I stated earlier, I believe the spirit of competition is better when the hardware is level.
And in my reply to Felix's post if all the engines were running on a cluster of whatever size, I would think that was great.
> To be honest, nobody is interested in a tournament with equal hardware ...
I am. That is all I have ever said.
> Today's cluster will probably have less computing power than a laptop a few years up the road.
hope so...btw I dream of having the Rybka cluster so I can have run on 2,048 cores
You can always sell the cluster :)
This is wrong! It is a proven fact that pimps prefer large sedans to carry their hos around in. Any large Mercedes is ideal for this task!
You can always divorce :)
But do you know the German Autobahn? Many of them have no speed limit.
it's time for us men to regain some lost territory in the man/wife - what you can/what you can't do battle.
check out the movie Old School - a classic!
Hey and perhaps it's time your wife realizes she's married to a pimp!
She might even enjoy it
A pimp's car is a Chrysler 300 with a custom paint job, spinning hubcaps and a clever personalized license plate. Here are some examples:
http://www.pinklimocompany.co.uk/pink-limo-company-vehicles.asp Definitely take the interior tour on this one. This is truly a pimp car, 100%.
The Chrysler 300 has long been an admired vehicle in the personal services industry.
German pimps love Corvettes, Dodge Vipers and Mercedes. I really don't understand this - but it looks like they don't like bimmers.
The idea behind a pimp car is external ostentation combined with elaborate customized comfort and features, similar to the clothes a successful pimp wears. Hence the term "pimp my ride", which is the title of a television program here in the U.S. that ran for a number of years, where a group of mechanics dream up and execute incredibly creative custom designs.
I think the big difference between German pimps and Americans is that on our side of the Atlantic when you think "pimp" you automatically think a black guy with multiple gold fillings wearing flamboyant 1970s clothes, as in numerous black exploitation films of that period. The current reality might be very different, but that's the stereotype. And of course, such a stereotype would drive a pink car. Famous owners of pink cars: Cab Calloway, Sugar Ray Robinson, Elvis Presley. I suppose it takes a big, undeniably male personality to deflect the gay connotations.
> A Corvette must be within reach for you.
just got an sms AED 39,376,609.83 is the available balance in your current a/c 101-xxxxxx-01
> actually such a rule wouldn't change much, e.g. sjeng used a cluster comparable to Rybka's and so on. The teams with cluster support already get good hardware and there's no big unfair hardware difference.
That is fine and once again I would like to reiterate that I am not saying anything is unfair. All the participants entered knowing the rules. And the rules for that section were whatever hardware a team wanted was fine.
I just like the competitive idea of equal hardware. For me, it is more interesting to follow as a competition.
> well, it's a fair competition, no big hardware disadvantages, that's what I'm saying.
To a certain degree I think you and are discussing apples and oranges.
If tournaments are going to have open hardware sections that is fine and that is the way it is. I would never call it unfair because any programmer has the right to participate or to not participate by the rules as stated.
And they all have equal chances to try and up their hardware.
I just find the idea of equal hardware more aesthetically pleasing from a competitive point of view.
> well, and I say that the hardware is already rather "equal".
As I said we are talking about apples and oranges and different aesthetics.
> i understand your points well.the average guy buying a chess program will say for example.i have a dual-core laptop or so and ask what is strongest program for my computer.
However 9 games or so will not answer this question, you need to play many more games to answer this question such as cegt and ccrl do. Just because shredder won the software section does not make it the strongest chess program out there.
For 1 min game, 5 min game and classic time controls?
Actually the main tournament is also not of "that" big value, as I said, rating lists mean much more to me.
I'm just no fan of creating too many world championships and making regulations that artificially change the competition.
People might think running on 800 cores is a big advantage.I think one thing most people forget is Jonny was stable at 800 cores and that itself deserves a big round of applause.It is not easy to tune a cluster and it takes ages to really use a cluster as effectively as possible.
I am sure Lukas will agree but running the typical 1/0 test for cluster is pretty useless.
Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill