Rybka Chess Community Forum
What is the country that have jurisdiction for ICGA?
Does ICGA have bylaws of charter?
Are they know?
La La Land!
Here is the map locating the ICGA Offices found in the annex off of the executioner's stairway to the scaffold in the Fortress of Gara The Deranged.
Levy's curious response to Freidel in the Chessbase interview, along the lines that they have no obligation to be legally registered, implies, to me anyway and I an no lawyer of course, that this organisation doesn't exist in any real sense. It's just a name. So, I guess the answer to your question is that you may be best off treating it as a sum of whichever individuals you would deem to have acted and address them individually or collectively.
> Levy's curious response to Freidel in the Chessbase interview, along the lines that they have no obligation to be legally registered,
Yes, I remember that.
did you also notice Levy's reply to Freidel's question, who is legally and financially responsible? Levy pointed at an article in the ICGA Constitution, but when one googles at the article, it doesn't seem to actually answer the question. Well, not to my untrained eye. Can you interpret what he might have meant?
>that this organisation doesn't exist in any real sense
In fact the Cosa Nostra isn't registered, but it exists
The ICGA (the chess ICGA - not the chewing gum ICGA) pays a secretary and sells journals. They just don't pay any taxes (neither income tax nor VAT). In Europe this is illegal. I guess a hint to British (or Dutch) tax autorities might have some impact.
In that sense, I don't see why anyone respects them as having any authority to hold a world computer chess championship. Why doesn't FIDE hold this directly? Until something like this occurs, it seems likely that all ICGA chess events will be weaker than the weakest of any of Graham's various tournaments.
Edit: And, I should add, less closely followed.
> Why doesn't FIDE hold this directly?
Be careful what you wish for. Sure, they offer a degree of superficial legitimacy, but you'd be trading sex robots for aliens from outer space.
no need for these organisations anymore in computer chess, massive social media connectivity renders hierarchical structures redundant, all can be organised from the bottom up, as it has been for some time now. massive network automated testing and results publication renders small tournaments redundant, as is also the case for some time.
I don't completely agree. Your points are well taken: determining which is the strongest program under controlled (i.e. scientific or quasi-scientific) conditions is certainly best done by independent bodies interconnected by social media. This approach determines the coveted #1 ranking.
However there is still a place for human-interest contests between chess programs under uncontrolled conditions, i.e. where there is no limit on your hardware or opening books and (key element) the program authors show up in person to face off against each other. That approach determines "world champion". One could say, not without reason, that such a contest would be redundant or archaic. But nonetheless, such a contest could, with proper marketing, be of considerable interest within the hobby. Just imagine how many would follow a match where Rajlich came out of retirement with a mystery upgrade of Rybka and faced off against Houdart in a simulcast. I think thousands would tune in.
Well fine, but such an event can be set up by anyone, again using social media. It could be, but doesn't have to be face to face physically, all can be done remotely using cameras and broadcast by some sort of web site. The unique selling point would not be FIDÉ or any other org, but the programs and programmers. Good luck if you think it monetisable, my guess is that it would be difficult even to charge for view, stuff is supposed to be free nowadays. Big sponsors? Do any of them in past ever come back twice? They would need to be offered somethign special, and there is nothing very special to offer. Better, organise from bottom up, make a nice web site and do it for free.
Is this not EXACTLY what CCT and ACCA events are? That's the reason we started to organize such events and why we still do.
No, not exactly, Nelson has a bigger idea, but that's fine, it's what happens when the hierarchical model is ditched and stuff is organised from the bottom up, a multiplicity, you can choose whatever suits. The meet yearly in Mongolia at great expense and hassle model, where the programs and programmers are basically sold to a corporate sponsor (has one ever come back for a second time by the way?) is more or less redundant. You don't bother attending. The top programs don't attend. The added value to the programmers of being there has been devalued, they can network in other ways nowand the knowledge that the title has little meaning because the top progs are excluded/not there, has devalued the title. Too much hassle, too much expense, too little added value.
Bottom up organizing sounds great until you get into the practicalities.
If you are going to ask putative contenders for a bona fide "world championship" to meet at some mutually-agreeable location (the face-to-face clash of leading rivals is what makes such a contest compelling) for a contest that might require one or two weeks of their lives, you have to offer the contestants a decent prize fund with guarantees. And that is only the tip of the iceberg in terms of costs. You need a location, an impresario, an arbiter, an organizer who establishes ground rules, maybe a live commentator/interviewer. You need a programmer or IT person to run the live feed--this part can be done on the cheap, but do you want an on-the-cheap championship match?
There's more, too. For the contestants it isn't merely a matter of showing up in a Che Guevara t-shirt with a laptop remotely connected to a supercomputer somewhere. There's months of preparation for the contest. Opening prep, hardware configuration and testing, optimization of who knows how many things. When you're asking the leading guys to compete in serious competition with a credible "world championship" affixed what you're really asking the contenders to undertake is a multi-month campaign. (I know this because I've talked to both of them about it.)
What all this means is that you need a professional organization and a sponsor or two. Amateurs would be very unlikely to pull this off unless they had deep pockets and were prepared to work practically full-time for months to make it all happen smoothly.
Er, Comrade Hernandez, bottom up organising does not necessarily imply amateur or Che Guevara T shirts or unwashed masses. There are plenty of the bourgeois professional classes kicking around, and not necessarily a shortage of money either. If that's the kind of "professional" organisation you are referring to. Initiate a campaign, put your target budget onto kickstarter.com, use social media and you may be able to snowball effect it into action. Like, here's the plan, we intend to raise 50K, if we do, are you in .... sign up your key partners on that basis and off you go. Might even work.
Er, Trotsky, did you miss the part about how much collective labor would be involved to pull this off? I think you underestimate the difficulty of the class struggle; it would be a Stakhanovite effort. Kickstarter is a notable capitalist approach to initiatives such as these, but much central planning would still be needed. Nonetheless, our dialogue is following a pattern of thesis, antithesis and synthesis which might well bring us to dialectical materialist conclusions.
If you raise the capital, comrade, you can buy the labour. Alternatively, in the new social-anarchist economy, the workers will come together collectively and give their time freely, from each according to his abilities. Probably the actual requirement is a charismatic leader who then fades away after the snowball has got rolling. The workers will know what to do.
Raising capital, by the way, does not necessarily imply "capitalist" in the sense you are presumably using the word. All projects, capitalist, socialist or collective usually require "capital". Kickstarter is just a bottom up, collective means of acquiring the capital, and it has the neat attraction that money pledged is not taken from the donor unless the target is reached within the time frame set.
It figures a Trotsky would emphasize the metaphor of a snowball. For my part, it is "four legs good, two legs bad" rather than "I will work harder!" Baaaaaa.
Apart from that there is a great deal of fantasy involved in a) bringing Rajlich out of retirement, b) persuading Houdart to participate in such a contest when the whole idea doesn't mesh with his business plan at all, c) getting Kaufman (in lieu of the ailing Dailey) to step in as a substitute for either of them in a putative "world championship" match, which would inherently have less public appeal because the first two are the marquee players in terms of name recognition for the time being.
Just imagine how many would follow a match where Rajlich came out of retirement with a mystery upgrade of Rybka and faced off against Houdart in a simulcast. I think thousands would tune in.
We'll, comrade, history proved your plan to be the fantasy of a bourgeois opportunist and thus an infantile disorder. You will taken out and shot ;-)
Surely you can get 10 years of work out of him first at the gulags.
Gulags??? You're out of step! Make him a valued associate at Walmart for $7.25 per hour! Walmart workers are encouraged to regard Walmart as "Mother"
You should always love your Mother! (hehehe)Perfect!
Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill